Subject: Re: [lojban] Are attitudinals assertions? (was: Attitudinals again (was: Sapi...

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 11:33:11 EDT

In a message dated 6/16/2001 6:59:14 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> When discussing attitudinals in English, it seems wrong that some turn an
> assertion into something else, and some don't. However, when you look at the
> corresponding bridi, some turn an assertion into something else, and some 
> don't.
> Thus having "a'o" and such be translated into English differently is 
> because of
> something that would seem perfectly natural to someone who spoke entirely in
> Lojban.
> 

I am not sure that I follow. If I say {mi pacna lenu ko'a klama}, this is an 
assertion, while {a'o ko'a klama} is not. Is it the {ko'a klama} that you 
are talking about? It is not asserted in either case. But, alas, it is also 
not asserted in the case of {mi gleki lenu ko'a klama}, though it is 
presupposed in this case and not in the {pacna} case -- {lenu} clauses aren't 
asserted anywhere. So, maybe what you mean is that some attitude brivla form 
sentences with {lenu} clauses which presuppose the truth of the enclaused 
bridi and some don't. But that will not quite get the distinction, since, 
for example, {krici} does not presuppose the truth of its enclaused bridi but 
the corresponding attitudinal does combine to make an assertion of that bridi.