Return-Path: <@SEGATE.SUNET.SE:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi  with smtp
	(Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0sBFPr-0009acC; Tue, 16 May 95 08:43 EET DST
Message-Id: <m0sBFPr-0009acC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v0.1a) with SMTP id 32D23E1A ; Tue, 16 May 1995 7:43:28 +0100
Date:         Tue, 16 May 1995 01:22:49 -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: Reflexivity
X-To:         dpt@abel.MATH.HARVARD.EDU
X-cc:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 757
Lines: 19

Looking at the debate on sevzi, I suspect that the wording of the definition
is the weak point.  "self-image" was specifically intended by me to refer to
reflexivity.  But English had no obvious word for it. "He loves his reflexive"
(???).

I see no problem in my image of sevzi with saying
"le toknu cu lumci leri sevzi  as
being essentially identical in meaning to
"le toknu cu lumci ri"


I can probably be convinced that there is indeed a separate concept of "Self"
that sevzi should cover, and we need a different way to lujvo-ize a reflexive.

I might be inclined to just give "ri" a rafsi - "riz" is the only relevant
one available though.  And the rafsi assignments for sevzi assumed the usage
frequency implicit in its being the reflexive.

lojbab