Message-Id: <199310091023.AA01222@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Date:         Sat, 9 Oct 1993 06:21:39 -0400
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
Status: RO

Subject: vehicle/means places on various gismu, litru vs. klama

There seems to be some confusion about these places.  A "vehicle or
means" does not necessarily imply some physical "thing" carrying you.
If you "walk" the means is your legs.  I would NOT rule out spirits
"leaving" the body at death.  Indeed "death" in this case would seem to
be the means.  Certain occultists believe in astral travel (i.e. the
mind leaves the body) and I guess the mind itself, or maybe some other
technical term such people use could be used to describe the "means" by
which it does so.

As for route places, they are a little bit trickier.  But those trai ned
in math certainly have concepts of vectors and directed line segments
that have an origin and do not necessarily have a destination.

In Achilles paradox, Achilles has a route, but no destination,ing the sun.  In
the concept of revolution, though, we DO NOT CONSIDER those boundary
conditions.  Whether the Earth revolves around the sun does not depend
on any conditions far in the past or far in the future.  Right now it is
happening.  I would contend, contrary to Art P., that natural human
thought does NOT always ascribe starting and ending points to motion.
My son is perfectly capable of throwing a ball with no thought or
apparent realization that it will eventually hit something.  (Note that
the "destination" place of renro may include merely a 'direction').

In the case of revolution around the sun, it is apparent that in a
single revolution, the earth comes "back to its starting point".
Scientists know this is not the case since the orbit changes slightly,
the sun moves throught the galaxy, etc. so when it reaches its 'starting
point', that point is really somewhere else.  So does a single
revolution start and stop at the same point or not - depends on how you
look at it.  Yet we can determine whether a revolution has occurred even
if we do not agree on the starting and stopping points.  Thus it seems
to me that for any relative motions, litru is generally the appropriate
term, and NOT klama, because the route apparently travelled does not
match up with a real and specifiable value for origin and destination
that can be ascribed truth functionally.

Moreover, my claim about how motion is expressed is supported by
linguistics, since languages DO make distinctions between coming and
going and travelling.  Indeed Russian has three related families of
verbs of motion (at least), one involving vehicular motion (yexat'), one
involving motion on foot (but also having a strong destination place,
such that non-foot travel sometimes gets stuck in this category if the
focus is on destination (idti), and motion without focus on origin or
destinaion (xodit').  Ivan or someone else may need to correct my
classification or characterization, but it is very clear that the people
using the language consider that the word choice is important.  My kids
protest if I use the wrong word.

lojbab