From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Tue Oct 12 10:42:17 1993 Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Tue, 12 Oct 1993 14:45:24 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Tue, 12 Oct 1993 14:45:17 -0400 Message-Id: <199310121845.AA22553@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0786; Tue, 12 Oct 93 14:43:24 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9000; Tue, 12 Oct 93 14:45:05 EDT Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1993 14:42:17 EDT Reply-To: Jorge LLambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge LLambias Subject: Re: TECH: Lean Lujvo and fat gismu To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Status: RO X-Status: > As I said in another message, I remove places from a lujvo by declaring them > irrelevant, generall using "claxu" after a semantic expression of the term > to be eliminated. > > lojbab I'm not sure if I understand. Do you mean: xelklacau (xe klama claxu) c1=k1 (c2=k5) k2 k3 k4 x1 goes to x2 from x3 along x4 without any means/vehicle It works, but this doesn't make it irrelevant. It emphasises that there are no means/vehicle. > Actually, if we are considering deleting a means place from one of the motion > words, I would be inclined to make it litru that has the place deleted. It > is, after all, pure focus on the route, and I can see that the means is as > speculatively superfluous as origin and destination. I have always seen klama > as the most complete specification or concept, and it also has usage in the > form of its BAI tag to add each of its 5 places onto other concepts that don't > have the place. > > lojbab Sounds reasonable. I see that the BAI {xeka'a} is useful, so the x5 should be kept in {klama}. Then something like {ka tolcnerli'u} could serve for "inertia". Jorge