Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by nfs2.digex.net with SMTP id AA07502 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 19:18:23 -0500 Message-Id: <199501250018.AA07502@nfs2.digex.net> Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1254; Tue, 24 Jan 95 19:20:13 EST Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7499; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 19:05:49 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 19:06:48 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Subject: Re: to'o X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Bob LeChevalier Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Tue Jan 24 19:18:27 1995 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu la lojbab cusku di'e > No, my statement is that there is too much usage to have such a chhange be > acceptasble. In the Lojban text that appeared in Lojban list, there has been no use of za and zu as tcita. One or two uses of zi, copying vi I think, where ca would have been better. This is expected, since "some time to the past or future of..." doesn't seem a concept needed very often. No uses of vu, three uses of va, (two of which by me in the Quixote translation, which I will remove next time I revise it) and quite a number of uses of vi, but mostly contrary to the tense paper interpretation. > The tense system we have now is real complex. I don't think it's that complex. > I just read out of the grammar > and use that to try to recall what we meant by the pieces. "offset" seems > pretty obvious though, and the FAhAs were put in to give offsets. According to my Webster's, there are two (relevant here) meanings of "offset": origin (archaic meaning) and displacement. As I understand it, the FAhAs give the direction of the displacement, and the VAs give the magnitude. Their sumti complements are (according to the tense paper) always the origin of the displacement. Since there is no way of giving a magnitude as a sumti, and since the origin can already be given with the FAhAs, it seemed reasonable that the magnitude be given by the VAs, which are precisely vague magnitudes. If it can't be done with VAs, then shouldn't there be some alternative to give more precise magnitudes? Jorge