Return-Path: Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rXgYb-00007VC; Fri, 27 Jan 95 04:37 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 EAA28837 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 04:37:03 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (MAILER@SEARN) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-13 #2494) id <01HMBPNFBSBK0000WY@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 02:32:29 +0200 (EET) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9830; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 03:33:31 +0100 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 00:33:41 +0000 (GMT) From: Iain Alexander Subject: Re: more on vi/fa'a/to'o Sender: Lojban list To: Veijo Vilva Reply-to: ia@STRYX.DEMON.CO.UK Message-id: <01HMBPNG560I0000WY@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: 1044 Lines: 36 I thought the idea was that one pair (fa'a/to'o, I think) was about motion relative to the specified point (if any), and the other (ze'o/zo'i) was about motion starting from the specified point, but relative to the origin. So mo'ifa'a ko'a towards X mo'ito'o ko'a away from X mo'ize'o ko'a outwards from X (i.e. away from here, starting from X) mo'izo'i ko'a inwards from X (i.e. towards here, starting from X) ^ | mo'ize'o | mo'ifa'a | mo'ito'o -------> X -------> | | mo'izo'i v O So {ze'o} and {zo'i} are special cases of {to'o}. I suggest the following corresponding static interpretations. fa'a near to (more or less redundant with {ne'a}) to'o distant from (more or less redundant with {na'ene'a}) zo'i cis, on this side of ze'o trans, on the other side of ko ca'o zvati to'o lei srasu Keep off the grass! -- Iain Alexander ia@stryx.demon.co.uk I.Alexander@bra0125.wins.icl.co.uk