From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Fri Jan 21 18:10:58 1994
Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 21 Jan 1994 13:25:03 -0500
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 21 Jan 1994 13:24:59 -0500
Message-Id: <199401211824.AA00930@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)    with BSMTP id 8154; Fri, 21 Jan 94 13:22:25 EST
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with  BSMTP id 2895; Fri, 21 Jan 94 13:23:56 EDT
Date:         Fri, 21 Jan 1994 18:10:58 GMT
Reply-To: Colin Fine <C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Colin Fine <C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: pinka lo vi tcima
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Nick:
> It struck me as a surpise too, but this seems to be how pacna's place
>structure has been redefined. The new gloss refers explicitly to "expecting"
>for {pacna be fi li piso'a}

Indeed, but there are two different 'expect's in English. As I interpret the
gi'uste, 'pacna' has an element of desire, and so pacna be fi li piso'a means
'I think it likely and approve of that '. I believe that the expect you intended
did not have that connotation.

        Colin