Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Sat, 5 Feb 1994 18:31:23 -0500 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Sat, 5 Feb 1994 18:31:19 -0500 Message-Id: <199402052331.AA03854@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4424; Sat, 05 Feb 94 18:28:33 EST Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1599; Sat, 05 Feb 94 18:30:15 EDT Date: Sat, 5 Feb 1994 16:49:27 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: cukta X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Sat Feb 5 11:49:27 1994 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET The gi'uste says: ------------------ cukta cku book x1 is a book about subject/theme/story x2 by author x3 for audience x4 preserved in medium x5 1f 163 [this is a quantity of text, and not the physical object (= selpapri); x2 may be a convention rather than a subject]; (cf. cfika, prina, prosa, tcidu) ------------------- In the lessons, there are many examples that use {cukta} as a physical object. For example: lesson01: do cu darxi la suzn. le birka ku le cukta ku (1.4-13) lesson01: ta cu darxi le stedu ku le cukta ku (1.6-5) (Different place structures for {darxi} here, also) lesson08: alis.: mi cu lebna le bunre ku .i le bunre ku cu cukta lesson08: alis.: .u'u le cukta ku cu farlu .i le cukta ku cu cnita le stizu ku lesson08: rik.: le cukta ku cu jibni mi .i mi cu cpacu le cukta ku le loldi ku lesson12: 2: ko [cu] catlu .i le cukta [ku] cu galtu lesson12: 1: mi [cu] birti le nu mi [cu] punji le cukta [ku] le stizu [ku] [kei] [ku] lesson17: A: ko cpacu le xunre cukta le jubme lesson18: ko dunda le cukta le ninmu poi pritu la djan. lesson19: le verba cu bevri le cukta And there are many others. I agree with the lessons, rather than with the gi'uste (they are closer to what 'usage' is, no?). If we want to insist that it is not a physical object, then we should not use 'book' in the definition, no matter how helpful it is as a keyword, because a book is in the first place a physical object, and the more abstract meaning of 'work' ("obra" in Spanish, "verko" in Esp-o), is, I think, secondary. Are two copies of "War and Peace" that are preserved in different media one {cukta}, or two {cukta}? If one, then the x5 place is wrong, if two, then we are talking of the physical object. As an aside, I also don't understand the comment that x2 may be a convention. Jorge