Received: from mail-fa0-f61.google.com ([209.85.161.61]:52481) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1W7DQc-00082j-66 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 16:18:29 -0800 Received: by mail-fa0-f61.google.com with SMTP id x10sf573760fax.6 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 16:18:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=pwEsmUs7csyxTPU1ECZ0YwFvYZcboNdvEb45O8aQP4I=; b=VBFM8wrRU1au6WzLnRvnLV7oGVLLJV4uw6yEkRv0/Rdt46RWk1I8k7O9Iubqki3Gl8 EHVClXtIqa2ROed203wQx9WPtQK8VLl+NrOLqFwCRUKfKnRif8qk2UqXohQuYlh4x0l+ qvQT3w/CdshUdApao1O6XLYXfbyopF1+8q3L6MDIvmXoYNZUhp2RhI0QDAd0vsxFv2BT erUIeJEnTw2b50NgbCUZUFn2XSJGGBmCTDusf5scosFRzEwEPA8IHYMzR6jzpIOOlK07 +HLcGC2B9kmLPrW+NJnfJvaabryWYFUjM0JO4ttqMKjJtwWo0t8wwr7iVELgCSRmJ8W0 AZLA== X-Received: by 10.180.206.199 with SMTP id lq7mr153344wic.9.1390695494782; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 16:18:14 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.99.199 with SMTP id es7ls656969wib.5.canary; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 16:18:14 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.149.141 with SMTP id ua13mr7395720wib.5.1390695494154; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 16:18:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net. [212.227.17.21]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c48si2171186eeb.1.2014.01.25.16.18.14 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 25 Jan 2014 16:18:14 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.17.21 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.17.21; Received: from [192.168.2.108] ([93.220.86.234]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LmKOI-1VYhxH3FxK-00Zubd for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 01:18:13 +0100 Message-ID: <52E4544C.4080702@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 01:18:20 +0100 From: selpa'i User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] [oz] {binxo} References: <52E449FD.90002@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:cqmOX6nBYDLFKCWwMrjpDbKMPvCgv4dKZGW4B768U+hFsYNC3lf 4Ev+l+J93MFsQuLV1Ubk53/wgrZJHrYWiwrJkviTz881vAJuFf82LNvhzOhFSKAxM/eysZY H1YZLuQL4uqw11oPHgwZ9q1p6tXeenNAqhy9IhbSWnQOAHHisNWGQoj6YIh7xdAF363Nafl j+U9j48EnYCUQB5IvP76A== X-Original-Sender: seladwa@gmx.de X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.17.21 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=seladwa@gmx.de Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / la .asiz. cu cusku di'e > That was my bet, but then I find examples (3) and (4) quite odd. Are you > sure you didn't want to use properties there? Yes, properties would be less clumsy there. > By the way, what do you think about the idea of using {co'a} to replace > property-binxo? People tend to associate {co'a} with processes, but > there is no reason to limit its scope like that. Sure, {co'a} is often enough, and I use it a lot myself. It just lacks the sense of transformation that I get from {binxo}. I would say that {ro nu binxo lo ka broda cu nu co'a broda .i ku'i na ku ro nu co'a broda cu nu binxo lo ka broda}. That is, to me, {binxo} is about an experiencer undergoing a change (where experiencer should be understood loosely in the thematic role sense. Certainly a binxo1 need not be sentient); it is making a claim specifically about the binxo1. {co'a} on the other hand just says that some event starts to occur, with no focus on any of its parts. That's why I don't consider them the same, but as I said, {co'a} is always true when {binxo} is, though not vice-versa. The difference is often subtle or completely invisible, but sometimes it isn't. mi'e la selpa'i -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.