Message-Id: <199512072243.AAA04139@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Thu, 7 Dec 1995 17:02:43 -0500
Reply-To: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: TECH: new cmavo "ju'e"
To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1251
Lines: 39

la djan cusku di'e

> > Which connective do you use for {ba'ibo}?
> I don't see that this one makes sense:  ba'i/basti doesn't take event
> (or other abstract) arguments.

It may:

        le nu mi klama le zarci cu basti le nu mi stali le zdani
        I went to the store instead of staying home.

But I wasn't thinking of event connections. I was thinking, for example of:

        mi pilno le dakfu ku ba'ibo le jinci le nu katna le pelji
        I use the knife instead of the scissors to cut the paper.

> To say "I, replaced by you, am going",
> use "mi ne ba'i do", which is "mi noi do basti ke'a".

Yes, but that is a different meaning: "I am going having been
replaced by you in doing something else." I was thinking of the
"instead of" connective.

> This is not the same as "My going replaces your going" which would be
> "lenu mi klama cu basti lenu do klama"

Right. Why did you say that {basti} can't take event arguments, then?

> or "mi ju'eba'ibo do klama";
> but does this case really mean anything at all?  It doesn't convey
> much to me.

Well, suppose that you were invited somewhere, but for some reason you
can't go and you give your invitation to me. Then I say

        mi ba'ibo do klama
        I go instead of you.

Jorge