From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Thu Oct 28 15:22:42 1993 Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 28 Oct 1993 19:34:11 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 28 Oct 1993 19:34:05 -0400 Message-Id: <199310282334.AA02355@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8079; Thu, 28 Oct 93 19:31:59 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9989; Thu, 28 Oct 93 19:27:03 EDT Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1993 19:22:42 EDT Reply-To: Jorge LLambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge LLambias Subject: Re: {cikre} as fat gismu X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: la bob cusku di'e > cikre repair 'fix' > x1 repairs/mends/fixes x2 for use x3 by user x4 > > Every repair that I have encountered in my life has been for some > purpose. I have never met an unmotivated repair. Maybe an x3 is necessary, although it is strange that {spofu} doesn't have anything equivalent. In any case, I don't think x3 is the motivation of the repair, but rather the use to which the repaired object can be put. > (I've seen repairs > that were not necessary for the object or institution `fixed', but > these repairs had uses: to make money for the repairer or to hurt > competitors.) That's a use of {le nu cikre}, not of {le se cikre}. > Likewise, fixes or repairs have an intended user. They > must be! There is no way to avoid making a repair for some user. If > the work is not done for a user, it is not a repair, but some other > activity, such as art. A mechanic repairs a car. The x3 is the customary use of a car, but what is the x4? The owner of the car? A generic human being? A generic driver? It is totally irrelevant who will use the car, to the act of repairing it. And anyway, the potential user is a part of the x3. > Also, as a practical matter, {te cikre} is a very useful expression, > since it defines what a rebuilt artifact is used for, which may be > different than its original purpose. This will become more important > as recycling becomes more important. Yes, x3 seems ok. But x4 is redundant. Jorge