Message-Id: <199409232349.AA18784@nfs1.digex.net>
Date:         Sat, 24 Sep 1994 00:38:10 +0100
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk>
Subject:      Re: remarks on gismu lexicology
To: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@access.digex.net>
In-Reply-To:  (Your message of Thu, 22 Sep 94 21:21:43 EDT.)
Status: RO

Jorge replying to me:
> > (4) How to say "I search the pockets"? "mi zukte fe
> > le nu catlu le daski kei fi le nu mi penmi/ponse/jitro/kavbu"?
> > (Or with lujvo, "mi catlu zei zukte le daski le nu
> > mi penmi/ponse/jitro/kavbu".)
> Since {sisku} is not going away, sisycta (sisku catlu) may be
> more clear than ctazu'e (catlu zukte). I don't see in the last
> one where you get a place for the looked for object.

The looked for object would either be a "lenu ponse/cpacu" as
x3 analogous to x3 of zukte, or it could be a stipulated x3
for the lujvo.

> > (5) How to say "watch, heed, pay attention to"? 'Zgana'
> > doesn't seem right.
> I'v seen {kurji} used in this sense, but I don't like it.
> How do you take care of an event?

I don't like it either.

> > (6) simlu: x1 seems/appears to have property(ies) x2 to
> > observer x3 under conditions x4.
> > So "I seem blue" is "mi simlu le ka blanu"?
> > Then how to say "It seems to be raining, it seems that it
> > is raining"? I think we should be able to say "simlu fa
> > le duhu carvi" - that is, x1 of simlu is a duhu abstraction
> > and x2 is scrapped.
>
> If you change du'u to nu, I agree. Nick mentioned this a short
> while ago, too.

In this case I guess simlu would mean "x1 seems-to-be-actual/real",
in which case there;s no need to restrict it to event abstractions.
For example "Lo cukta cu simlu mi" would mean "There seems to me
to be a book". I'd be happy with that.

> > (7) galfi: x1 (event) modifies/alters/changes x2 into x3
> >     stika: x1 (event) adjusts/changes x2 (ka/ni) in amount/degree x3
> > I think the x1 place of these should be abolished.
> > Galfi then becomes redundant with binxo:
> >     binxo: x1 becomes/changes into x2 under conditions x3
>
> Then why change it?

Parsimony, and distaste for galfi's egregious x1. Not good reasons
for most Lojbanists, I know.

> > And I think binxo should have an extra place:
> >     binxo: x1 changes from belonging to category (ka) x2
> >       into belonging to category (ka) x3
>
> The more lojbanic order would be into x2 from x3.

Right.

> > (9) Is there an agreed expression for look/appearance/
> > countance/visual stimulus, without there being an implied
> > perceiver?
>
> I'd say {jvinu}.

Yes - I hadn't realized. (Gismu keywords are chosen to cunningly
disguise the extensive patterns among gismu.)

> > (11) Is there a standard expression for 'saliva'?
>
> The list gives molselpu'u, but I guess you don't like it. I can't
> think of anything better.

I thought I might have overlooked a gismu. A better lujvo is
molselcigle.

Thanks for your comments.
-----
And