Message-Id: <m0s5q2L-0009acC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Mon, 1 May 1995 03:35:32 -0400
Reply-To:     Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: more response to jorge from lojbab
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1194
Lines: 32

>Xorxes:
>>>        mi ba xruti zi lei mu mentu
>>>        I'll be back in five minutes.
>
>Lojbab:
>>and I would just use "ba'o lei mu mintu" or more likely "ba'o le mintu
>>mumei".
>
>But this depends heavily on the use of the intensional; we only know from
>context that it's the five mintues beginning in the present which precedes
>the act of returning.  Probably that's good enough most of the time, but
>it's funny that there's no reasonably concise way of talking logically and
>unambiguiously about time intervals.  How could we say this without
>depending on intensionality?  Difficult, because 1) there's no word for
>"now", and 2) there's no convenient way to talk about the span between two
>events.

1) is easy:
 mi ba xruti zi lei mu mentu poi [bazi traji] lamji ti

since "ti" refers to the demonsstrative present in both space and time.

2) le temci talks about time intervals, and we have BIhI to specify an interval
based on either bounds or center point.

So why not le temci po'u da bi'o de
where da and de are the starting and ending points of the interval.

I think we have previously decided that sirji and jbini among others also
cover the concept of interval.

lojbab