Message-Id: <199512091515.RAA10502@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Sat, 9 Dec 1995 13:12:14 MET
Reply-To: Goran Topic <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Goran Topic <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>
Subject:      Re: PLI: length vs longness
To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 922
Lines: 24

> I think "(having length)" is intended to mean "has a physical length" as
> opposed to (say) a temporal length.

I don't know. Expressing "long stick" and "long time" analoguously (is
this correct?) is not a linguistic universal, but many languages I have
info on do so. E.g. some Amerindian just can't say that in the same way,
and would find it very illogical to treat time and space equally, but
I don't see how else can we do that in lojban. Consider:

    It's been long since you've left.

The only thing I can think of is

    lo temci be lenu do cliva cu clani

co'o mi'e. goran.

PS. Of course, beside the obvious {do puze'u cliva}

--
GAT/CS/O d?@ H s:-@ !g p1(2)@ !au(0?) a- w+(+++) (!)v-@(+) C++(++++)
UU/H(+) P++>++++ L(>+) !3 E>++ N+ K(+) W--(---) M-- !V(--) -po+ Y(+)
t+@(+++) !5 !j R+@ G-@(J++) tv+(++) b++@ D++ B? e+* u@ h!$ f?(+) r--
!n(+@) y+. GeekCode v2.1, modifications left to reader to puzzle out