BPFK Section: Attitudinal Specifiers

From Lojban
Revision as of 16:42, 4 November 2013 by Gleki (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

{CODE(wrap="1]]jbocre: 19:01 <ksion> No but seriously: your suggestion about {go'i} is one of dumbest Lojban ideas I've ever heard, and that's something ;P jbocre: 19:02 <vensa> :) it comes from my laziness and wanting to be able to answer "yes" as shortly as possible jbocre: 19:02 <vensa> like the teenagers who shorten "yes" to "ye" jbocre: 19:02 <vensa> *yeh" jbocre: 19:03 <@xalbo> In seriousness, it's that sort of thing that gives tinkering a bad name. "{goi} is shorter than {go'i}, so we should change it." "That breaks the sequence." "What sequence?" jbocre: 19:03 <@xalbo> Wanting to change things without understanding why they are the way they are makes people more apt to reject your "ideas" out of hand. jbocre: 19:03 <vensa> I understand why it is that way jbocre: 19:03 <vensa> I just thought since we already wrecked the {tel} series, who cares jbocre: 19:04 <vensa> but Ill admit I would maybe prefer it another way jbocre: 19:04 <labnytru> Mm... jbocre: 19:04 <vensa> leave go'i jbocre: 19:04 <labnytru> Have I ever mentioned how much I love this channel? jbocre: 19:04 <@Broca> I'm pretty sure sel ter vel xel came after the rafsi of the gismu were assigned. jbocre: 19:04 <labnytru> It is one of the intellectual wonders of the world. jbocre: 19:04 <vensa> maybe just ADD {goi} to mean something to the extent of "unspecific bridi" (understandable from context) jbocre: 19:04 <UukGoblin> labnytru, no, but yuo mentioned you have infinite amounts of money, or something like that ;-] jbocre: 19:04 <vensa> just like we have {do'i} jbocre: 19:05 <vensa> and give today's {goi} some other long cmavo jbocre: 19:05 <vensa> that way, we could have the best of both worlds jbocre: 19:05 <vensa> + we'll gain a bridi versio of {do'i} wich is missing IMO jbocre: 19:05 <@xalbo> Except that we lose {goi}, which is handy. jbocre: 19:06 <vensa> xalbo: you dont lose it jbocre: 19:06 <ksion> zo co'e djica lonu tavla do doi la vensa jbocre: 19:06 <vensa> define it some other CV'VV cmavo jbocre: 19:06 <@Broca> vensa: you do know that we already have a word for “unspecified bridi”? jbocre: 19:06 <vensa> ohhhh jbocre: 19:06 <vensa> oops jbocre: 19:06 <vensa> yeah. I was told that before actually jbocre: 19:06 <vensa> co'e jbocre: 19:06 <vensa> sorry jbocre: 19:07 <vensa> so, can I answer a {xu} question by saying {co'e}? jbocre: 19:07 <labnytru> One day, I'm going to write up a description of Lojbanistan as a physical country...the natural beauty of humankind's intellectual apex will be unsurpassed. jbocre: 19:07 <labnytru> It'll be like...language and mathematical allegories and shit. jbocre: 19:07 <vensa> valsi do'i jbocre: 19:07 <@xalbo> You can. But it could mean either {go'i} or {na go'i}. jbocre: 19:07 <valsi> do'i = pro-sumti: elliptical/unspecified utterance variable. jbocre: 19:07 <UukGoblin> labnytru, define 'one day' jbocre: 19:08 <vensa> hmm... then I want a cmavo for "unspecific BUT ALSO *previously uttered*" jbocre: 19:08 <selpa`i> Answering {co'e} is like saying "whatever I dont care, fuck off" jbocre: 19:08 <labnytru> After I learn the language completely and finish my first book, "Cleft: The Epic of Rend'ii". jbocre: 19:08 <@xalbo> it is written, go no to the jbopre for counsel, for they will say both {go'i} and {na go'i}, as well as {go'i na'i}, {na'e go'i}, {to'e go'i}, and {mi gletu lo mamta be do} jbocre: 19:08 <vensa> that way {co'e} cant be {na go'i} becuz noone uttered the negation of the bridi in question. understand? jbocre: 19:08 <vensa> .u'i jbocre: 19:09 <ksion> xa'a'a jbocre: 19:09 <UukGoblin> labnytru, might take a while then ;-] jbocre: 19:09 <labnytru> Indeed. jbocre: 19:09 <ksion> doi la xalbo zo co'e se smuni la'e lu mi gletu lo mamta be do li'u va'o lonu la kribacr vi zvati kei po'o jbocre: 19:10 <vensa> .u'i jbocre: 19:10 <@Broca> vensa: you want something that is unspecified wrt go'a and go'u? jbocre: 19:10 <vensa> broca: yes. but add {go'e} and {go'i} jbocre: 19:10 <@xalbo> mi gletu cei broda lo mamta be do jbocre: 19:10 <kribacr> .i broda jbocre: 19:10 <kribacr> .i si'a broda jbocre: 19:10 <kribacr> .i pu broda jbocre: 19:10 <kribacr> .i ba'o broda jbocre: 19:10 <vensa> something that is one of the {go'a go'e go'i go'u} jbocre: 19:11 <@xalbo> (Now I'm gong to snicker every time someone uses {broda} without redefining, until I forget again) jbocre: 19:11 <kribacr> .u'i jbocre: 19:11 <vensa> and give it the cmavo {goi} jbocre: 19:11 <vensa> I think that would be beautiful AND coherent jbocre: 19:11 <@xalbo> vensa: Why in the name of fuck do you believe this word is more important than {goi}? jbocre: 19:11 <@Broca> Whoa, that is a very specific level of unspecificness. jbocre: 19:11 <vensa> kribacr: do you hear a ding when someone says {kribacr} or {gletu}? jbocre: 19:12 <kribacr> haha jbocre: 19:12 <@xalbo> vensa: Actually, he just highlights on {mamta} jbocre: 19:12 <kribacr> kribacr yes. jbocre: 19:12 <labnytru> Shoot. jbocre: 19:12 <labnytru> I was going to make a fancy speech, but then I realized that I shouldn't do that here without speaking in Lojban. jbocre: 19:12 <vensa> xalbo: becuz it would allow we to answer {xu} questions (something that happens MORE OFTEN than using {goi}) with a single syllable AND not break the GOhA pattern jbocre: 19:12 <kribacr> I'm using the webchat at work because I'm lazy. It only highlights on my name. jbocre: 19:12 <labnytru> It would be shameful to say it in English. jbocre: 19:13 <@Broca> xalbo: because he wants natlang “yeah”, and doesn't care about “henceforth referred to as”. jbocre: 19:13 <vensa> exactly! :) jbocre: 19:13 <ksion> ko pilno zo ie jbocre: 19:13 <vensa> broca: I still care about "henceforth refered to as" enough to give it a different cmavo jbocre: 19:14 <vensa> ksion: I was told that once jbocre: 19:14 <vensa> but it's not exactly the same thing jbocre: 19:14 <ksion> ke'u ko pilno zo ie jbocre: 19:14 <ksion> Close enough for someone who wants to redefine {go'i} ;P jbocre: 19:14 <@xalbo> You have already used more syllables in this conversation than you will saying {ja'a go'i} for the rest of your life. jbocre: 19:14 <vensa> .u'isai jbocre: 19:14 <selpa`i> haha jbocre: 19:15 <labnytru> In Lojbanistan, everyone looks like Nu Mou from Final Fantasy Tactics A & A2. jbocre: 19:15 * ksion shudders at though that vensa might realise about {na go'i} having - shock! horror! - TWO more syllabes than "no". jbocre: 19:15 <vensa> If that's your last remaining argument, I will count this as a victory :) jbocre: 19:15 <ksion> .y. mi pu da'i bilga lonu smaji jbocre: 19:16 <vensa> ksion: I'm thinking of replacing {nago'i} with {noi} jk jbocre: 19:16 <ksion> .ii.u'i jbocre: 19:16 <labnytru> We all wear really comfortable robes and live in the natural beauty of Lojbanistan, using optimized systems theory technology to provide all of life's necessities without money. jbocre: 19:16 <@xalbo> vensa: You can count it as whatever you like. That will only increment the number of things you are wrong about, which is a small percent error. jbocre: 19:17 <labnytru> Free love, free land, free minds... jbocre: 19:17 <labnytru> Free life.


jbocre: 19:17 <vensa> .u'i{CODE}