Subject: Re: [lojban] RE: Opposite of za'o

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2000 20:41:53 EDT

In a message dated 00-07-02 12:28:58 EDT, xorxes writes:

<< I would classify {co'i} together with what
you have as spanners, because it is a point but non-transitional.
I think more than the extension of the interval what is
significant is the change of state. >>

But an achievement is the paradigm change of state - from not to so: winning 
(or coming in last for that matter), being born, getting elected, etc. And 
all changes of state are ultimately instantaneous, though the activities 
around them can go on for a while and often get called by the same name. 
(Not that the duration element is of moment here.)

<<Indeed, but we can't talk about the natural ending point
when it doesn't happen either. {mo'u} is natural and actual,
not just natural whether or not actual, isn't it?
Maybe this transition is not that important?
We go from "it is happening" to "it is still happening"
when it becomes remarkable that it is happening,
but the actual turning point is too fuzzy to detect,
and similarly we go from "it is already happening" to
"it is happening" when it is no longer remarkable that
it is happening, but again no detectable turning point.>>

But, if these premature and postsenile cases are to be allowed at all, we can 
-- and must -- be able to talk about the natural ending and starting even if 
it does not occur, else there can be no talk of unnatural ones. They may be 
fuzzy, but there is still a line.

<<Wouldn't it be {mo'u za'o na}? Otherwise we'd get a premature
end to the overextended not. Could they cancel out?>>

Nice one! Yes.