Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0qL9QU-000021C; Tue, 5 Jul 94 15:16 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3375; Tue, 05 Jul 94 15:15:20 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3371; Tue, 5 Jul 1994 15:14:43 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1760; Tue, 5 Jul 1994 14:13:19 +0200 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 1994 02:26:32 -0400 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: Problem perhaps To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Content-Length: 1960 Lines: 47 JL> > 1. {talsa} is explicitly given as needing a person as x1, with suggestio JL> > for other gismu if x1 is a situation or what-have-you. Can you see a JL> > reason for this? Is regarding an inanimate object as actively JL> > presenting a challenge a result of malglico? Or is it just acceptabl JL> > metaphorical use of the language? JL> JL> I find it acceptable, but I don't know what is the official position. I JL> think The intent is an agentive challenge, for example as in a guard saying "who goes there?" or perhaps the glove to the face of a challenge to a duel. There is intent involved, and thus there must be an intender/agent. Something that is "challenging" that is not an agent, is generally more of a hindrance/obstruction, or is a "difficulty" (nandu). If there is some context that I am missing here that suggests a different type of challenge than difficulty or hindrance, please explain further. JL> > 2. The second sentence is attempting to say that I want to reply to all JL> > messages in the language in which they were written; I'm not sure tha JL> > what I've written achieves that... Have you got any better ideas? JL> JL> I don't think the x2 of spuda can be a set. Now, I think that JL> JL> mi spuda ro notci bau le ri bangu JL> JL> means that I reply to each message in its language (if the x2 of spuda can JL> be an object). If it means that I reply in the language of all of them, JL> then I don't understand what {ro} means. Perhaps someone could clarify? We have a way to make this explicit: mi spuda ro notci bau le bangu pe pa'a where pa'a is the respectively modal operator. It isn;t cleasr to me whether one would want to write more explicitly bau le ri spuda pe pa'a or bau le spuda pe pa'a ri There is also a 'respectively' connective, that could be used in a termset, but I am not much good at remembering termset cmavo and grammar, since they come up so seldom. lojbab