Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 14 Oct 1993 15:09:53 -0400
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 14 Oct 1993 15:08:26 -0400
Message-Id: <199310141908.AA20084@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)    with BSMTP id 0605; Thu, 14 Oct 93 15:06:31 EDT
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with  BSMTP id 1013; Thu, 14 Oct 93 15:09:09 EDT
Date:         Thu, 14 Oct 1993 20:01:28 +0100
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: more on fat gismu
X-To:         lojban@cuvma.BITNET
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
In-Reply-To:  (Your message of Thu, 14 Oct 93 11:29:14 W.)
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-From-Space-Date: Thu Oct 14 21:01:28 1993
X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET

> #The only one I don't like from that list is {muvdu}. I'd prefer it without
> #an x1 and use {muvgau} for that concept. (Removing x1 from {muvdu} would
> #achieve what I wanted by removing x5 from {klama}.) I can't believe that you
> #can't talk in Lojban about movement without bringing up a cause.
>
> I'll just break my silence here (got my foot nudged by a car this morning,
> so I'm certainly not going to get any work done) to say that I support this
> change. It's consistent with Lojban (in which we encode intransitives as
> single gismu more often than transitives), and it makes sense to be able to
> talk about uncaused, vehicle-less motion in at least one gismu, when the
> caused version, {muvgau}, is so straightforward to derive.

I third this.

----
And                  KO JBOBANPEHO