Message-Id: <MAILQUEUE2-102.931007022931.352@hylkn1.Helsinki.FI>
Date:         Wed, 6 Oct 1993 20:27:35 EDT
Reply-To: Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender: vilva
From: Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Lean Lujvo and fat gismu
To: Veijo Vilva <VILVA@viikki21.helsinki.fi>
Content-Length: 1056
Lines: 28

la and cusku di'e

> But I also think the klama/cliva/litru trio wastes gismus:
> the rare cases where cliva or litru are needed (infinite
> motions) could be handled by zihoing off some places
> from klama. But, as I said, so what: people will just have
> to learn a couple of almost entirely unnecessary & useless gismu;
> it's not really a problem.

I'm not sure this is true. I can imagine that it could be the case that:

        mi ca ba'o cliva le frasygu'e

an simultaneously false that:

        mi ca ba'o klama zi'o le frasygu'e


What I would say is a waste of gismu is to have the vehicle place, which
makes them useless to say, for example, that the Moon travels around the
Earth, unless it's in some mythological carriage, or that a body travels
with constant velocity if no force is applied to it, or that a bullet
takes 3 seconds in going from A to B, and things like that. In these cases
you do need some heavy zi'oing. The best I could come up with for this
sort of thing is {sezmu'u}, but this is very unsatisfactory.

co'o mi'e xorxes