From richardt@flash.net Sat Jun 09 18:41:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: richardt@flash.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 10 Jun 2001 01:41:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 91722 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2001 01:41:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Jun 2001 01:41:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pimout2-int.prodigy.net) (207.115.63.101) by mta2 with SMTP; 10 Jun 2001 01:41:34 -0000 Received: from flash.net ([216.51.103.126]) by pimout2-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f5A1fWk194236 for ; Sat, 9 Jun 2001 21:41:32 -0400 Sender: richardt@pimout2-int.prodigy.net Message-ID: <3B22BFAA.C8B2428B@flash.net> Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 19:30:34 -0500 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22smp i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] An approach to attitudinals References: <20010609150406.A506@twcny.rr.com> <3B22BB9F.77FB73E9@flash.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Richard Todd Richard Todd wrote: > Obviosly for things like hope and intent, the default > use will be less common than the propositional one, > and usually even silly. The more I think about this, the {I hope for this, and claim it is true} does actually convey meaningful information. It could be saying that I am pleased about it, in the sense that I was hoping that it would be true and it is. So, maybe the form's not so silly after all. It just sounds funny in english...