Message-Id: <199509270007.UAA13202@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Tue, 26 Sep 1995 18:53:21 +0100
Reply-To: "Steven M. Belknap" <sbelknap@UIC.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: "Steven M. Belknap" <sbelknap@UIC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: drata vs. frica
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR

>>Cube1 is different from cube2 :: This would be expressed by the gismu <drata>.
>>
>>Suppose I then painted one cube red and the other blue
>>
>>Cube1 is different from cube2 in property color :: This would be expressed
>>by the gismu <frica>
>
>Is this expressed as:
>
>.i le pamei kubli le remei kubli cu frica le ka skari
>The first cube differs from the second cube in the property of colour.
>
>How does this differ from:
>
>.i le pamei kubli le remei kubli cu drata *le ka skari
>The first cube is other than the second cube by the standard of the propery of
>colour.
>
>Is it valid to use the property colour as the standard for difference?  I think
>the crux of this problem is related to the meaning of the x3 place.

I consider the distinctness of the two cubes to be inherent. Their colors
are irrelevant. Even if they were built by nanotech robots, and their
structures were precisely matched, molecule for molecule, crystal for
crystal, they are distinct because they are actually two separate and
distinct objects, their color, temperature, or other properties being
irrelevant.

Thus,

.i le pamei kubli le remei kubli cu drata *le ka skari

is an odd construction, since from my point of view, the color is
irrelevant. Actually, I'm not sure why drata is X3, the third place nearly
always being superfluous as I understand drata.

-Steven


Steven M. Belknap, M.D.
Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Medicine
University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria

email: sbelknap@uic.edu
Voice: 309/671-3403
Fax:   309/671-8413