From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Jul 02 13:02:52 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21239 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2000 20:02:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Jul 2000 20:02:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.240.165) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Jul 2000 20:02:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 17368 invoked by uid 0); 2 Jul 2000 20:02:52 -0000 Message-ID: <20000702200252.17367.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.42.154.237 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 02 Jul 2000 13:02:52 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.154.237] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] A rose is a rose is a rose... Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 13:02:52 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la aulun cusku di'e >So I'd imagine the only way could be to "verbalize" nouns >like in some Native American idioms, where a statement like, say, >"there >are houses yonder" could be expressed as "it is housing far >over there" - /tu zdani/ or maybe simply /vu zdani/ (?). Yes, {vu zdani} says just that. Indeed {le vu zdani} is "that house far over there", or if you prefer, "that thing which is housing far over there". >Thus the >idea could be expressed that something like a house, tree etc. is >somehow emanating its very being in a continuous ('materialized') >stream - hence existing as long as it is active, grammatically >similar to 'the rain' (in many languages as English, German, French, >Italian, Romanian etc. - and maybe Hungarian too): "it is raining", >"es regnet", "il pleut", "piove", "ploua" - "esik"(=it falls, >namely "it=the falling"). Yes, I think that's a good approach. >If this is the fact, the well-known English phrase "A rose is a rose >is a rose..." (unusual in English grammar and hence its sense not >quite obvious at first glance) in Lojban simply could be "lo rozgu cu >rozgu" or even just "rozgu". Or {za'o rozgu}, it keeps on being a rose? :) >Now, back to /botpi/: if it is right that a /botpi/ is not an >(actual) /botpi/ with its X2 unplaced (not just undefined), isn't its >non- >existence still more obvious (and comprehensive) when its 3rd place >X3 is /noda/? Yes, certainly. But there is no discussion about this because even in English you can't have a bottle made of no material, can you? So that part is not controversial. >A /botpi/ that doesn't "glass" (plastic, ceramic >etc.) is not even a potential /botpi/ (not even a virtual one in >one's mind). But you could have potential botpi if you have the contents and are looking for the container. You may prefer to call this potential se botpi, but the relation is the same. >So, I think that /botpi/ (bottling) is only possible if >this 'action' performs with all qualities of /botpi/ i.e. with all >places set with /da/ (just like rain is no longer rain when it stops >raining). What is your opinion? Definitely so. (A different question is how seriously you take all the places of some gismu. I tend to ignore "tertirxu" places, places that I think really have nothing to do with the relationship, so in fact the gismu that I am using is not the one that appears in the gismu list. But that can only be done with very irrelevant and high places, not with an x2.) co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com