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 m0sAxRD-0009acC; Mon, 15 May 95 13:31 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v0.1a) with SMTP id 4496A2DB ; Mon, 15 May 1995 12:31:29 +0100 Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 06:31:07 -0400 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: Questions X-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1245 Lines: 29 >I tend to understand it as "Mark", which is a common English name >for persons. Of course, it can be the name of an event, but that's >not what the English gloss above suggests. Yes it is a common English name for persons. But we are dealing with a sssimple case of metonymy, where the name of something is being ussed to represent an event that thing (persson) participated in. The problem is in knowing what "la mark" refers to as an event. My convention has been to have it refer to the person's life/existence as an event. "tu'a la mark" by exclusion implies to me some more restricted event, such as an act of talking. The logical suspicion is uncalled for, since there is a rather minimal predication implied by "pe". If the link was "po'u" I might agree with you. (Make that "ne" and not "pe" having reread the initial quote: >> >> > la djan. ne pu la mark. [ge'u] [cu] melbi tavla [vau] >> >> > John, who was (incidentally) before Mark, is a beautiful-talker. >> >> >> >> Doesn't this show exactly the confusion about {pu} mentioned earlier? >> >> {la mark.} is not an event. >> > >> >I agree with you. It might mean, I suppose, that John lived before >> >Mark was born. >> >> Why is "la mark." not an event? ) lojbab