From jjllambias@hotmail.com Thu Jun 14 17:03:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 15 Jun 2001 00:03:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 56350 invoked from network); 15 Jun 2001 00:03:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Jun 2001 00:03:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Jun 2001 00:03:28 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 14 Jun 2001 17:03:28 -0700 Received: from 200.41.247.35 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:03:28 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.41.247.35] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] If it ain't broke, don't fix it (was an approach to attitudinals) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:03:28 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jun 2001 00:03:28.0546 (UTC) FILETIME=[9B141820:01C0F52E] From: "Jorge Llambias" la lojbab cusku di'e >I would have been more >likely to accept that there was a problem if someone used a'o mi caca'a >klama and did not intend it to be assertive The only way I can understand that sentence is as non-assertive: "I hope I'm actually going". If you use a'o followed by what you intend as an assertion, I will almost certainly misunderstand you. Hopefully you won't take {xu mi caca'a klama} or {da'i mi caca'a klama} as assertions as well! >(of course he is actually in >the process of going and if he is interrupted and does not reach the >destination then the statement will be seen later as being false). If he believes that he is actually going, he shouldn't say that he hopes that he is actually going. That's very confusing. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.