Message-Id: <m0sBFxE-0009acC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Tue, 16 May 1995 02:16:36 -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: TEXT: le gunse ku joi le lorxu
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1590
Lines: 30

>I suspect all that stuff is there because {la lojbab. purci ke tarske djuno}.
>Anyway, I didn't mean the suggestion seriously.  I suspect that that the
>existence of x4 requires that the movement of x1 around x2 be ballistic in
>nature: a ball can {mluni}, but a person doesn't really {mluni} an oven.
>
>--
>John Cowan                                              cowan@ccil.org

Or at least if a person does mluni an oven, then you need to be able to
match all the places in the metaphor, and not just the convenient ones.

It actually had little to do with my studies in astronomy.  Even before I
was serious about Loglan, others (jimc???) were arguing about adding gravity
well places to
"fall" and "orientation" places to directions and "standards" places to colors.
This came from the invasion of hard-science types into the Loglan community
in the mid-70s, as everyone brough their own idiosyncratic specialty
knowledge to bear on their predicates of choice.  At one point much earlier
in the Lojban development, i carried this to extremes, tending up with 4 and
5 places on lots of things.  There are still a few remnants of this, including
mluni, but more specifically I am thinking of klupe, whose x3 and x4 were
typical of a lot of substantive predicate words.

Even before Jorge, the wave of expanding place strutures subsided and many
were eliminated.  Jorge would have us eliminate still more, but I think
we have reached a good balance.  One just has to be wary NOT to use a brivla
metaphorically unless you can metaphorize all of the places of the place
structure.

lojbab