From tim@desert.net Thu Nov 30 14:37:37 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: tim@mysql.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 30 Nov 2000 22:37:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 48926 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2000 22:37:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 30 Nov 2000 22:37:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.hcisp.net) (208.60.89.18) by mta2 with SMTP; 30 Nov 2000 22:37:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 3961 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2000 23:36:25 -0000 Received: from modem10.hcisp.net (HELO threads.polyesthetic.msg) (exim@208.60.89.76) by stargate.hcisp.net with SMTP; 30 Nov 2000 23:36:25 -0000 Received: from tim by threads.polyesthetic.msg with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 141cJy-000D96-00; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 17:36:54 -0500 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 17:36:54 -0500 To: David Scriven Cc: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: zoi gy. Good Morning! .gy. Message-ID: <20001130173654.B49957@threads.polyesthetic.msg> References: <906fkk+mdub@eGroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <906fkk+mdub@eGroups.com>; from topaz@linkline.com on Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 09:08:36PM +0000 X-eGroups-From: Thimble Smith From: Thimble Smith On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 09:08:36PM +0000, David Scriven wrote: > > As Pycyn@aol.com just pointed out to me, the English greeting > 'good morning" is actually extremely vague in terms of meaning and > intent, despite its relative uniformity as a convention. It can be > interpreted as a mere formality, or as an observation, or a wish, > or a blessing, etc. It is the vagueness of the expression that does > not translate well into lojban. So I suppose my original question > was contaminated by "malglico." A tool that might help clarify thinking about this is the Ninio and Wheeler taxonomy for communicative acts. The description I have for it is in the book, _Pragmatic Development_, by Ninio and Snow (ISBN 0-8133-2471-8). Anyway, they have a category of speech acts, "Management of the transition between separation and co-presence", with "Greet on meeting" meaning "To mark entering into co-presence". I know a culture where the standard greeting is "I de no?", ["Are you?"]. The response is, "Mi de, o" ["I am, uh-huh"]. Then the first person says, "I ko aki no?" ["You came here?"], and the response is, "Mi ko aki". These phrases obviously aren't literal questions and answers. mi'e tim.