Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0tFob9-0000ZTC; Wed, 15 Nov 95 22:38 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2721CFEB ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 21:38:23 +0100 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 20:34:12 +0000 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: pointing To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Content-Length: 755 Lines: 19 Pointing is, I believe, universal, so Peter is surely quite right that we need a word for it. But, as far as I am aware, there are no established grounds for arguing that some concept should be expressible by gismu rather than by lujvo. Maybe there should be such grounds, but at any rate, for the time being I suppose the argument must proceed by showing what's wrong with candidate lujvo. > I think part of the problem is that you are misinterpretting the meaning > of "point" in English. From a practical standpoint, it means "indicate" > or "draw attention to". {jundi/jarco zei troci} or {troci zei jundi/jarco}? But I have nothing against a gismu for "point to", though I would prefer it to be inceived by discarding an obsolete gismu. --- And