Message-Id: <MAILQUEUE2-102.931011204209.352@hylkn1.Helsinki.FI>
Date:         Mon, 11 Oct 1993 14:40:03 EDT
Reply-To: Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender: vilva
From: Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: means/vehicle
To: Veijo Vilva <VILVA@viikki21.helsinki.fi>
Content-Length: 2263
Lines: 43

Art says:

> My position was that of course you can use klama for both instances.
> The ball was using a means, inertia+gavity, but you should not have
> to be able to express that to use klama.  Leave the place empty.
> If anyone else really wants to talk about the means or vehicle,
> they can draw attention to that place and you can duck the question
> with "I don't know".  Also, the seeming motion of the sun has a
> means, namely the change in our perspective caused by the earth's
> rotation on its axis.  Again, leave it blank and let someone else
> worry about it.  If you can think of it as motion then it really
> has values for all those places, its just that the values can be
> so complex/contorted as best left to the listener as an exercise
> (or written up as a thesis).

Ok, if "means" means "explanation of why it moves/can be said to move",
then the place doesn't prohibit the concept I have in mind, but it
gives to {klama} a very strange meaning. I say that there is a concept
of movement where the means are not part of the concept. This is what
Galileo got into trouble for. If you are in a spaceship and see another
spaceship passing by, you may say that the "means" of its going is that
the two ships are in relative motion, but it seems a bit circular. The
"means" place could be left in {litru}, maybe, so as not to make it too
skinny, but I don't like it in {klama}. Then {li'ukla} gives you back
the current {klama}, and everybody is happy.

>     Use the language to talk about those thing you really want to
> talk about.  The places get filled in optionally as they serve your
> desire to express things.  An empty place does not say anything.

It's part of the overall meaning of the gismu you're using.

> The listener is not allowed to draw inference that an empty place
> means anything more than the speaker did not opt to mention it.

Agreed. But both speaker and listener should be aware that the place exists,
in order to understand what's being said. (At least that's how I understand
that the theory goes.) In most situations, the two gismu with or without the
extra place may be practically identical, but when you want to say something
that is affected by the presence of that place, it may make a difference.

Jorge