Print

Print


Saluton Jim (Henry),

> If you're explicitly explaining that you think X
> because Y, you could use "sxoqj" to emphasize the
> evidence acting causally on your thought processes,
> or "jqoqj" to emphasize the internal logic of your
> thought processes. If you were just expressing your
> thought and mentioning the evidence you base it on,
> you would use "jqoqj".

Interesa nuanco.  Gxi iel memorigas min pri la
diferenco en la germana inter "Er sagt, dass er
eine Maus hat" kaj "Er sagt, dass er eine Maus
habe" (li diras, ke li havas muson.) En la dua,
la parolanto ne nepre kredas la dirajxon de tiu "li."

> > "He doesn't think so because he doesn't have a
> > brain (to think at all)".
[...]
> I read it as "X is so self-evident that anyone with
> a brain thinks X. He doesn't think X. Therefore, he
> doesn't have a brain." This would probably use
> "jqoqn" (inference-therefore) if one is merely
> implying that X is fairly obvious without being
> quite self-evident, but "sxoqn" (logical-therefore)
> might be appropriate if the speaker thinks X is
> truly self-evident, or for emphatic irony.

Mi komencas vidi la valoron de tiaj subjunkcioj por
eviti tiajn miskomprenojn kiajn ni jxus spertis en
nia diskuto.  Ankaux utilus verbofinajxon por montri
ironion aux metaforon... almenaux en "logika" lingvo
aux esplora artlingvo, sed certe ne en helplingvo.

Amike salutas,
Thomas/Tomaso ALEXANDER.
www.NightinGael.Net
---Anything below this line is not from Thomas ---


		
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs