Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:47307)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCIfp7ILVEBCw_vn2BBoEOPbfuw@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RY1ub-00041o-RQ; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:46:54 -0800
Received: by dajx4 with SMTP id x4sf5699094daj.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:46:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender
         :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list
         :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=3kib75OGHGC8cemrOC9h6aKbdqLKS6VhRdxpOFx2gCc=;
        b=Yl3WRy+BKGIgr6nURMghlR7wuxFaEsaKJ0y+ayOeuEz0+Hd+cqZvQC4nHwN4DKd50K
         0iOTnPHLQt5ijBc1Zmb1t7n6Iqw34t2D9KuaPRkRWGsgBrmFuDm+vXCcvnZKtcylrRnw
         KhTIIHIEHvDYxYIqq/Qn85qmHyNn0bEsXfLVc=
Received: by 10.68.4.136 with SMTP id k8mr3591695pbk.11.1323204400805;
        Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:46:40 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.14.101 with SMTP id o5ls619979pbc.4.gmail; Tue, 06 Dec 2011
 12:46:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.14.100 with SMTP id o4mr5019250pbc.6.1323204399738;
        Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:46:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.14.100 with SMTP id o4mr5019241pbc.6.1323204399721;
        Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:46:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pz0-f47.google.com (mail-pz0-f47.google.com [209.85.210.47])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u7si404297pbn.2.2011.12.06.12.46.39
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:46:39 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.47;
Received: by dake40 with SMTP id e40so4898556dak.6
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:46:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.15.232 with SMTP id a8mr35780326pbd.129.1323204396770; Tue,
 06 Dec 2011 12:46:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.52.234 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 12:46:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAPAJj9Kk6zgouKjRyGGDybPcM49MhLa0Rf5waNML0WPFSymtZg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALMa68qP1rans_GfLQHb7nwthw9w5zJwEfrFr-t+uRP-FXNcMw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPAJj9Kk6zgouKjRyGGDybPcM49MhLa0Rf5waNML0WPFSymtZg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:46:36 -0300
Message-ID: <CALMa68oGMRUwXbsSWDAyZP3GfDb4dJw7P8b1f5KhF0JEwcPBHg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] state of {binxo}
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Felipe_Gon=E7alves_Assis?= <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: felipeg.assis@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.47 as permitted
 sender) smtp.mail=felipeg.assis@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

On 6 December 2011 06:35, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/12/5 Felipe Gon=E7alves Assis <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>:
>> coi
>>
>> Is there a consensus about the nature of binxo2? I mostly see
>> non-properties there, but I am not sure how to interpret that.
>>
>> I noticed that there was some discussions on the subject long ago,
>> but I didn't find any conclusion in favour of the object-object version
>> of {binxo}.
>
> coi .asiz.
>
> It's clear at least to me that binxo1 and binxo2 are not attributive
> properties and are related in terms of cenba2. binxo1 corresponds to
> cenba1. While {cenba} expresses a change of the x1 in some property
> and makes no reference to the resulting entity, {binxo} does say what
> the x1 transforms into but without specifying the properties in which
> the change occurs.
>
> {binxo} is also comparable to {galfi}. binxo1 & binxo2 correspond to
> galfi2 & galfi3:
>

ki'e .tiljan.
I agree with the last statement, and I extend my question to galfi3.

While I don't consider the concept of an object becoming a different
one to be illogical, I do opine that it brings more complications and
is less useful than that of an object acquiring a property.

If binxo2 is just an object that comes to existence while taking the place
of binxo1, then mu'a
  {ko'a binxo lo bisli}
doesn't entail at all that
  {ko'a na bisli pu lonu binxo},
since it could just as well refer to an iceberg becoming an ice sculpture.

ra'unai in English grammar, "The water becomes ice" is analysed as
subject-verb-predicate, just like "It seems blue", and unlike "I love you",
which is subject-verb-object.

mu'o
mi'e .asiz.

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.