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 m0qTmE0-000023C; Fri, 29 Jul 94 10:19 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3057; Fri, 29 Jul 94 10:18:10 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3055; Fri, 29 Jul 1994 10:18:09 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5030; Fri, 29 Jul 1994 09:17:15 +0200 Date: Fri, 29 Jul 1994 03:18:31 -0400 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: ciska bai tu'a zo bai X-To: nsn@vis.mu.oz.au X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 2079 Lines: 53 Nick says: << And the distinction doesn't look all that convincing any more, now that I stated it like that: is it that you can like someone without necessarily liking something they do? Anyone want to come to the rescue? We had extensive reasoning of this sort going on last year. >> "I like flowers" What event are the flowers doing such that I like them in this sentence? Is it even an event (rathert than a property)? More important, is the fact that we like something implicitly -AT A LINGUISTIC LEVEL (as opposed to a cognitive one) - mean that we can identify an event/property that the flowers are involved in that is what we like. At best we could say mi nelci leka da xrula Now, does this work for "I like you" mi nelci leka da bi do is the best I can come up with that matches the pattern. (I note in saying this that I am treading close to the as-yet-unresolved discussion with Randall Holmes on "me" and sets.) I don't like any predication that forces us back to "bi" in Lojban unless the essence of the claim is identity, and I am not sure that is true for the latter one. The alternative is mi nelci leka do zasti and I am not sure this means the same thing as mi nelci do and la cevni help us if we want to say that we like unicorns - we twist ourselves into the sisku issue again. The intent with "pluka" IS more specific to an event. I can like someone or something and still not be pleased with them (I'm a parent; need I say more.) But it is not them that I am displeased about in this case, but something that they did. Just as a safety check - in case someone thinks we DO need to make nelci take a property or event: what is the difference between this "prami"/"xebni" which are not unrelated to "nelci". We deny the linguistic capability to say "I love you" without meaning something rather more intricate. My instincts tell me that these emotions are reactions to things rather than events, and can be applied to events only when theyt are objectified as an abstract 'thing'. I hope that this has suitably muddied the waters lojbab