From jjllambias@xxxxxxx.xxxx Thu Nov 11 07:18:08 1999 X-Digest-Num: 281 Message-ID: <44114.281.1565.959273825@eGroups.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 07:18:08 PST From: "Jorge Llambias" Isn't that a bit repetitive? From "lenu la djan. mi'afra cu mukti lenu la >robin. darxi dy." it's fairly obvious that Robin's the one doing the >hitting. Yes, that's why it is not necessary to fill the x3 of mukti. The only other alternative I can see is that John's laughter motivates John himself to being hit by Robin, which is more unlikely. There are many Lojban predicates that take an argument that is always a sub-argument of one of the other arguments. This still can be useful when the event argument is not given explicitly, for instance: le nu la djan mi'afra cu mukti ma la robin John's laughter motivates Robin to do what? le nu la djan mi'afra cu mukti so'ida la robin John's laughter motivates Robin to do many things. le nu la djan mi'afra cu mukti lo vlile la robin John's laughter motivates Robin to do something violent. co'o mi'e xorxes