Message-Id: <m0r8wFS-00005XC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Sat, 19 Nov 1994 15:22:25 EST
Reply-To:     jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Cowan's summary: opacity and sumti-raising
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1212
Lines: 34

la lojbab cusku di'e

> We can solve the "look for object" problem most simply by just creating a
 lujvo
> for this meaning.

Ok, then that proves that there is nothing strange about a brivla meaning
"x1 looks for x2".

I find "x1 looks for something with property x2" more intricate, and so
I would prefer that this last one be handled with a lujvo based on the first
one, but that is of course my subjective judgement.


> studji or stujundji or faktoi all could be appropriate,
> perhaps with slightly different place structures according to the Nick
> formulary.

{faktoi} is "x1 tries to discover x2(du'u) about x3"

{stujundji} I suppose would be "x1 wants to know the location of x2", which
doesn't really have an active search-for component. Also, it only works
for things that have inherent locations. I suppose {studji} is meant as a
shortening of this one.

{zvajundji} would be the corresponding one for nonce location of an object.
Again, it doesn't really involve active searching. I think {zvadji} would
not serve in this case for a short form, because it seems to mean more
something like "x1 wants to be at x2".

{sisku} would be so much more useful with a simple, more basic meaning...


Jorge