Message-Id: <199502250032.AA11302@nfs1.digex.net>
From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Date: Fri Feb 24 19:32:16 1995
Subject:      Re: Existence and occurrence of events (was: ago24 & replies)
X-From-Space-Date: Fri Feb 24 19:32:16 1995
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu

And:
> I see what you're saying. Whether or not you're right simply depends
> on the definition of {troci}, or of the "succeeding" which trying
> implies. Has one succeeded simply if the event one tried to bring
> about comes about, or has one succeeded only if one is the cause
> of the event coming about. You appear to assume the former,
> whereas Lojbab & pc appear to assume the latter.

That's why I asked whether {troci} has an implied {gasnu} in it.
If it does, then what is the difference between:

        mi troci le nu le rokci cu muvdu

and:
        mi troci le nu mi gasnu le nu le rokci cu muvdu

If I have to be the cause in order to succeed anyway, then the
first one would simply be a short form of the second one.

Jorge