Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 3 Nov 1993 21:10:16 -0500 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 3 Nov 1993 21:10:13 -0500 Message-Id: <199311040210.AA05720@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2460; Wed, 03 Nov 93 21:10:05 EST Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 6827; Wed, 03 Nov 93 21:09:52 EDT Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1993 21:06:55 EST Reply-To: Jorge LLambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge LLambias Subject: Re: TECH: more thoughts on zi'o X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Wed Nov 3 16:06:55 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET la'o gy Richard Kennaway gy cusku di'e > It seems to me that if a place can be sensibly zi'o-ed, it doesn't belong > in the definition at all. I agree with a watered down version of this. If the zi'o-ed relationship is useful enough, there is no need to restrict the concept with that place. (i.e. we are in the presence of a "Fat Gismu" :) However, there are occasions when a place can be sensibly zi'o-ed, and yet the concept obtained is not quite what we want. e.g. palci be zi'o, could mean "absolute evil", and there are people who cosider this a sensible concept. We may not agree that something like that exists, but the concept is not unthinkable. On the other hand, palci be zo'e is a much more lojbanic concept. You can still talk about absolute evil in Lojban, but you have to be more roundabout. di'u mi se jinvi co'o mi'e xorxes