Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 3 Sep 1993 11:59:25 -0400
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 3 Sep 1993 11:59:17 -0400
Message-Id: <199309031559.AA06068@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)    with BSMTP id 9073; Fri, 03 Sep 93 11:57:35 EDT
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with  BSMTP id 4553; Fri, 03 Sep 93 11:59:47 EDT
Date:         Fri, 3 Sep 1993 11:56:40 EDT
Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: TECH: To become or not to become
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-From-Space-Date: Fri Sep  3 07:56:40 1993
X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET

la i,n cusku di'e

>  The problem comes
> when the "becoming" is a long drawn out process.
>
>         le pu'u co'a makcu
>         Growing up
>
> This is OK, and we can even emphasise the time span with
> {ze'u}, but we've been talking (recently) about {co'a}
> and {co'u} as if they were point events.

Just a comment on this. The right place for {ze'u}, I think, would be:

        le ze'u pu'u co'a makcu

because {le pu'u ze'u co'a makcu} is the process of starting a long maturity.

I think you are right that {co'a} and {co'u} need not be point events, but it
is not easy to give them a ZEhA interval directly, because ZEhAs don't
apply to the phase but to the event proper.

Is there any chance of expanding the grammar to allow a ZEhA after a ZAhO, for
this purpose?

co'o mi'e xorxes