From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Jun 10 18:03:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 11 Jun 2001 01:03:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 83803 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2001 01:03:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jun 2001 01:03:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.25) by mta3 with SMTP; 11 Jun 2001 01:03:11 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 10 Jun 2001 18:03:11 -0700 Received: from 200.41.247.45 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 01:03:11 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.41.247.45] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] An approach to attitudinals Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 01:03:11 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jun 2001 01:03:11.0939 (UTC) FILETIME=[494B7930:01C0F212] From: "Jorge Llambias" la xod cusku di'e >It would seem that the current state of affairs, with the attitudinals >divided up into two sets Is that the current state? Where are these two sets explicited? I would have said that the current state is much more messy. >(one set with one function and the other set with >two functions) is the result of analysis like pc proposes. I don't think there ever was any systematic analysis. I have never seen anything better than what's in the book, and that I never found very convincing. >Analysis where >we try to predict what people will express, and prune away power we think >they won't need. This is getting too abstract for me. Was there anything anyone proposed to prune? The only hard disagreement so far seems to be whether {a'o } can have two different meanings or whether it should have the one that we usually use it for. And there were several ways suggested for how to obtain that other meaning ("this gives me hope" instead of the usual "I hope for this"). >Isn't intent a feeling? The Japanese have a word: "gambaru". I don't know, I don't speak Japanese. Is it a feeling? When do you feel it? Can you feel it independently of an action or state of affairs you mean to bring about? >I think the fact that it's difficult to translate into English is a Good >Thing! That's because my goal with Lojban is Sapir-Whorf, not >communication only using concepts I already am very familiar with. (If I >only wanted to be understood, I'd use English.) That's fine, so you are satisfied that the English keywords used in the cmavo list are enough for you to know how to use them? For me they are not, that's why I try to find parallelisms and regularities wherever I can, and that is what opens the door for me to new insights. >Lastly, I intend to learn all the attitudinals, and I prefer to learn them >as abstract concepts that I apply on the spot in a way that attempts to >make sense. There's no other way. If you try to make sense of the keywords only, they often lead to contradictions, like the two possibilities for {a'o}. When we do encounter these, it is not a bad idea to discuss them though. >The specialization between pure emotion and propositional >attitudes can be observed in usage, instead of prescribed. Undoubtedly. >Some >attitudinals will tend to be used chiefly as one, some as the other, some >both, and other attitudinals will probably not be used much at all. Maybe we are in more agreement than what it seems. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.