From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Jun 13 11:57:44 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:57:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Dhu7o-0004U8-DP for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:57:33 -0700 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Dhu7o-0004U1-3Y for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:57:32 -0700 Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:57:32 -0700 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: zvati Message-ID: <20050613185732.GA13307@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <925d1756050609072757542a3c@mail.gmail.com> <925d175605060911227d7c6445@mail.gmail.com> <925d175605060914082a76fce1@mail.gmail.com> <20050610223041.GT22480@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20050613174958.GI4118@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <925d1756050613114053309f6f@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <925d1756050613114053309f6f@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 10156 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Moved off of beginners, cuz yeesh. On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 03:40:54PM -0300, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > On 6/13/05, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > I disagreed that zvati was purely locational, because of the way > > the English was written. I have been convinced that the > > intention was locational, and have updated jbovlaste to reflect > > this. > > I think describing {zvati} as "atemporal" confuses things more > than anything. Are you going to add "atemporal" to {zunle}, > {crane}, {sruri}, {snanu}, and all other spatial relationships > too? I could if you like. But I don't find any of them confusing in this respect; I did find zvati confusing. [snip examples] > Are all of these "atemporal"? All of them describe relative > positions, but normally they describe simultaneous positions. None of them specify that they can operate with events in both places, which is what confused me. > If I want to say that A is left of where B was, or in front of > where B was, or around of where B was, or south of where B was, > then that requires a more elaborate description. Then A is not > left/in front/around/south of/at B, but rather it is related to a > place where B was. Depends on context. > Spatial relationships assume that the two things being > compared are there at the same time. Depends on context. > {zvati} is not special in this regard, so if you describe it as > "atemporal" all the others would be atemporal too. *sigh* Look, it's really simple: I find zvati confusing, because it sounds to me like it is relating things in both space and time, rather than just space. I seem to be wrong. I want to change the wording to make the cunfusion I experienced less likely for others. If you don't like my wording change, suggest another one. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!" Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/