Message-Id: <m0tLVKz-0000ZUC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Thu, 30 Nov 1995 17:35:17 -0500
Reply-To:     Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: from the paper archives - pc on abstractors and tense
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 812
Lines: 18

And:
> Activities (and states) are atelic; accomplishments and achievements are
> telic. Telicity means having intrinsic boundaries rather than extrinsically
> imposed boundaries. The semantics of boundaries is not confined to
> situations.

Does telicity have to do with _having_ intrinsic boundaries or
_constituting_ an intrinsic boundary? I would have said that events
that correspond to a change of state would constitute an important
class (to die, to become, to cease, to make, to kill, to (come to)
understand, etc.)

More or less related: does {jimpe} mean being in a state of understanding
something, or does it mean to come to understand something? "Understand"
can have both meanings in English. Does {mi ba'o jimpe} mean that I no
longer understand or that I've already understood something?

Jorge