[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Lojban attitudinals
- To: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>, Eric Raymond <eric@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>, Eric Tiedemann <est@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
- Subject: Re: Lojban attitudinals
- From: And Rosta <cbmvax!uunet!UCL.AC.UK!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!ucleaar>
- In-Reply-To: (Your message of Fri, 29 Nov 91 09:56:21 PST.) <9111291756.AA16673@netcom.netcom.com
- Reply-To: And Rosta <cbmvax!uunet!UCL.AC.UK!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!ucleaar>
- Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!LOJBAN>
Doug comments perspicaciously on lojban attitudinals:
He reform ulates lojban cruel:kind as:
> compassion/empathy - cruelty
> pity/sympathy - uncaring
>
> Compassion and pity are very different attitudes, so they should be
> differentiated carefully.
This relates to my recent posting on the subject. I doubted the
'oppositionality' of cruel:kind, and found most of the other oppositions
to be privative. Doug's reformulation more clearly makes the
oppositions privative: presence/absence of cruelt (or mercy), and
presence/absence of pity.
Doug's suggestion is therefore in conformity with the majority of
attitudinals.
> Further additions:
> confidence - insecurity (internal)
> Compare with the list's: fear - security (external)
This complements my suggestion that fear could be integrated with the
hope attitudinals. Security, the present 'opposite' of fear, can,
following Doug, be opposed to insecurity.
> sorrow - unsorrow
> In English happiness and sorrow are often
> set as opposites, which is behaviorally untrue.
> The list rather inexplicably does not include any
> variant of sadness.
I think we think of happy:sad not as a privative opposition but as a
directional opposition modelled on up:down (high/low spirits, elated/
depressed). As Lojban would consider this malglico, it should presumably
therefore prefer Doug's suggestion.
> jaime vu - deja vu
> Extremely common attitudes/experiences;
> compare with the list's related familiarity/mystery
What's jaime vu?
> I would also change amusement/weariness to:
>
> amusement - gravity (seriousness)
>
> ...as a more accurate opposite.
Or: levity - gravity
and entertaining - tiresome
> Lastly, I am somewhat confused by the presence of a number of "speech
> actions":
> permission - prohibition
> request - negative request
> suggestion - abandon suggest - warning
> constraint - independence - challenge
>
> These all seem to be speech actions, making me wonder (A) why they are
> in a list of attitudinals, and (B) why the classic speech action of
> promise/oath is not there with them as well.
And benediction & malediction/imprecation.
> No doubt the answer lies in the intended use of the list in some way not
> yet clear to me.
The same goes for me too of course.
---
And