From @uga.cc.uga.edu:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Tue Sep 22 11:11:32 1992 Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Tue, 22 Sep 1992 11:11:31 -0400 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4280; Tue, 22 Sep 92 11:10:19 EDT Received: by UGA (Mailer R2.08 PTF008) id 5853; Tue, 22 Sep 92 11:10:17 EDT Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 11:10:33 -0400 Reply-To: "Mark E. Shoulson" Sender: Lojban list From: "Mark E. Shoulson" Subject: TECH.QUERY: zo bancu cu mo zo zmadu leka smuni X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch In-Reply-To: C.J.Fine%BRADFORD.AC.UK@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU's message of Mon, 21 Sep 1992 16:07:33 BST Status: RO X-Status: Message-ID: >Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1992 16:07:33 BST >From: C.J.Fine%BRADFORD.AC.UK@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU >I think we are getting misled by the English keyword "beyond" into supposing >that we are talking of spatial position (the primary meaning of "beyond"). >It seems to me that the distinction you are claiming between "zmadu" and >"bancu" is that the measurements are not only comparable with the specified >result, but also in some sense "in the same direction" (whatever that might >mean for non-spatial uses). But I do not like you using an spatial example >and then arguing from the special spatial properties of the example. Very well-put, Colin. Thanks for clearing that up. That's pretty much the same thing that's been bothering me about that response, but I couldn't express it as well. >I accept that there is a semantic difference between the two gismu. I cannot >see why "bancu" shouldn't have an x4. And I would encourage people to use >a lujvo for a specifically spatial sense of 'beyond'. I'm starting to accept the semantic difference, but if so, it is woefully underdefined. ~mark