Return-Path: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@vms.dc.LSOFT.COM
Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id GAA10577 for <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 06:54:59 +0200
Message-Id: <199602130454.GAA10577@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4E544EB2 ; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 5:55:13 +0100
Date:         Mon, 12 Feb 1996 18:21:28 +0000
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: GEN: almost-PROPOSAL: intervals
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 841
Lines: 19

Goran:
> 2. xe'i (with asperations of te'i-hood)
>   New cmavo; I do not know which selma'o, but it needs to combine
>   freely with tenses. Meaning of {xe'i <sumti>} should be "<sumti>
>   distance/interval". xe'i could be taken to signify only temporal
>   distance, and let fe'exe'i take care of the spatial ones, or
>   could signify distance in space-time (type of sumti decides which
>   it is, like xe'i lo mitre is clearly spatial, and xe'i lo nanca
>   is clearly temporal).

I prefer this, because (1) has the further disadvantage of the
redundancy of calling an interval/distance small or large and then
saying exactly how big it is.

I believe that the omission of this feature from the current
language is just an oversight; I think it would be in there if whoever
made the system had remembered they were needed.

coo, mie and