Subject: Re: [lojban] dai harder (was: If it ain't broke, don't fix it (was: an approa...

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 22:46:52 EDT

In a message dated 6/19/2001 8:44:50 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> i do la'e di'u xusra i mi do na tugni i no da zunti le nu do pilno
> zo dai le nu sinxa le do se zmanei i je'u a'o do ca'a pilno fi ba'e
> su'o da i mi'a pilno ji'o le nu nitcu
> 

Whence comes this necessity in the use of {dai}, without which we have gotten 
along these however many years? To be sure, the Book is not very clear about 
how to use it (polite version) and there seem to be a number of rival 
proposals that need to be evaluated. But a need? Not hardly, regardless of 
which plan gets settled on.

<la lojbab cusku di'e

> >la frank jinvi le du'u eikau la meris ti klama
> >la frank jdice le du'u eipeikau la meris ti klama
> >la frank jinvi le du'u la'akau la meris ti klama
> >la frank jinvi le du'u ku'ikau la meris ti klama

>Frank does not "think" or "opine" emotions.  Frank emotes them.

I don't think I anywhere said he did. How do you say
"Frank thinks that Mary should come"? Or "Frank thinks that
all flowers should be white"? If you don't like my way of
saying it, you should provide a better one.>

As for the first stuff, I am unclear where the indirect questions come from 
or what they have to do with the translations later: I suppose the first 
Lojban sentence means something like (though just what is unclear) "Frank 
has an opinion about whether Mary should come." I do agree that asking Frank 
to emote an {ei} seems a bit much -- maybe an overliteral reading of 
something in the Book about attitudinals.