Return-Path: Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rTwtW-00007SC; Mon, 16 Jan 95 21:15 EET Received: from fiport.funet.fi (fiport.funet.fi [128.214.109.150]) by kantti.helsinki.fi (8.6.9/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA14402 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 21:15:12 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (MAILER@SEARN) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-13 #2494) id <01HLXBG04T9S000NCB@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 19:14:32 +0200 (EET) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2558; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 20:11:46 +0100 Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 14:17:29 -0500 (EST) From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Subject: Re: ago (LONG and la'a incorrect :)) Sender: Lojban list To: Veijo Vilva Reply-to: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Message-id: <01HLXBG0P29I000NCB@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2066 Lines: 55 coi doi goran i do cusku di'e > .i ri'ada'i lonu lonu mi tcedjica lenu la lojban. klunu'i cu fanza do ku > ko cusku fi mi i ju'o na fanza i noda poi se cusku bau la lojban cu fanza mi i mi djica le nu la lojban mutce zmadu se pilno > .i lu da dunda lei da re fepni sera'a de li'u ba'e je'a tcegliklu i ie go'i i ku'i cafne fa le nu se pilno bau na'ebo la gliban va'o le samymu'e i pe'i binxo lo samymu'eklu selsku i le lojbo selmriste cu pagbu le samymu'e pe'ipei? ...... On the question of "ago"/"from now"/"away": > Yes. But I don't think the present is not useful. Especially the > spatial equivalent, VI series. Don't tell me you claim never to need > something like {ko'a kelci va le ckule}? That would be {ko'a kelci ki le ckule vaku} or simply {ko'a va kelci ki le ckule} or even {ko'a va kelci to'o le ckule}. The selmahos VA and ZI represent magnitudes, and their natural complements are magnitude specifiers. I don't see why they should do double duty for something that can be better said with members of PU and FAhA. Another thing is that {vi} is used a lot instead of {bu'u} to mean "at" or "in" (at least I have used it like that), and I think that's wrong, too. > There is much less meddling and change and trouble if we would just > introduce new sumti tcita, instead of changing the existing ones. I > mean, something like new cmavo, say, {xe'i} (after temci - te'i is not > allocated, if I didn't miss anything). I don't remember {xe'i} > experimental cmavo being in use, too. [examples omitted] > Enough raving. Tell me what you think. Or to shut up. :) I think that the best thing is to replace {xe'i} with {za} or {va} in your examples. The meddling would be only with the theory, because these words have seen very little actual use as sumti tcita. > ta'o is there a gismu for distance, like equivalent for {temci}, or is > it necessarily {nilda'o} or {da bi'i de mitre di}-like expressions? How about {tersei}? > co'o mi'e. goran. poi ko na .e'oga'inai catra vau zo'o co'o mi'e xorxes poi do'a ke'a do na catra vau zo'o