From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Mar 17 15:22:57 2006
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:22:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60)	(envelope-from <nobody@digitalkingdom.org>)	id 1FKOHI-0007qK-8h	for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:22:40 -0800
Received: from web81311.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.127])	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.60)	(envelope-from <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>)	id 1FKOHH-0007qC-Ac	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:22:40 -0800
Received: (qmail 6495 invoked by uid 60001); 17 Mar 2006 23:22:37 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;  s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net;  h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;  b=KrZDnVQaq03b/YtTMaeWegtuZLqPvgqTvDFi8cuScHpF5H9tP1zjoVketfHwoXGRoflYuyrABnjPPENK4wJaxCqXkQXZbzCxXXzU+WPvMGXK9kWCeajE9cbaRd1FZfbIR8siPrxXkWInWcyj3JU/hgM0VQScGXLvFV/v0QvYYEs=  ;
Message-ID: <20060317232237.6492.qmail@web81311.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Received: from [70.230.183.14] by web81311.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:22:37 PST
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:22:37 -0800 (PST)
From: John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [lojban] Re: semantic primes
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
In-Reply-To: <925d17560603171301w71378637w10d8d846c6ff783e@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-archive-position: 11163
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

I think it is important to stress the "in frame
of reference" version of x3, especially if the
"facing" version is creating problems.  But how
do we say a frame of reference?

--- Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 3/17/06, John E Clifford
> <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > Presumably, {pritu} serves both to locate an
> > object (x1) in relation to a sided object
> which
> > also has a directional orientation possible
> (x2)
> > and then tries to coordinate that with an
> > external position.
> 
> If the reference point serves both as
> positional reference
> and as orientation reference (as is often the
> case)
> it can be repeated in x2 and x3, no problem:
> 
>   le bersa cu zutse bu'u lo pritu be le patfu
> (bei ri)
>   The son sits at the right of the father (from
> the father's viewpoint).
> 
> Other schemes, that try to make x2 both the
> positional and the
> orientation reference, and x3 something else
> that plays with x2
> to get it to be an orientation reference, are
> so full of complications
> that I don't think it's worth even bothering
> with them.
> 
> I hope people will keep saying things like:
> 
>  le blanu bolci cu pritu le xunre bolci mi
>  "The blue ball is to the right of the red ball
> from my point to view."
> 
> and just ignore the x2 facing x3 complications.
> 
> mu'o mi'e xorxes
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
> lojban-list-request@lojban.org
> with the subject unsubscribe, or go to
> http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
> you're really stuck, send mail to
> secretary@lojban.org for help.
> 
> 



To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.