Subject: Re: [lojban] If it ain't broke, don't fix it (was an approach to attitudina...

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 18:15:13 EDT

In a message dated 6/15/2001 8:20:30 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> pycn wrote:
> >If Robin CA's point is correct, then, as 
> >I understand it, at least {a'unaicai} requires the assertion 
> >of the sentence (though I admit that that may not be what he 
> >meant, since he did not phrase it that way). 
> 
> So, you are unsure about whether {a'unaicai} requires the assertion of
> the sentence, and skeptical when others make a claim one way or
> another. Ok, let's continue....
> 

No, I am unsure whether that is what *Robin* meant, I have no doubt that 
{a'unaicai} is assertive.

<If you can say these things and not see the beauty of just allowing all
attitudinals in both forms, without having to question the speaker's
intent, then we are very different people.>

I see the beauties just fine. I also see some flaws. I am unsure which way 
the advantages go and so, being conservative in this at least and under the 
by-laws, I am inclined to work with the current system as long as possible.

<Richard, who wishes he could join the fun by making a claim about his
computer use during the Kennedy administration, but wasn't yet
born...I'd talk about my Reagan days, but that just seems pathetic
now...>
My wife reminded me that strictly I started under the Eisenhower 
administration, in the summer of 1960 (but my PhD diploma is signed by 
Reagan).