Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 17:55:51 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199711072255.RAA20340@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS Sender: Lojban list From: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS Subject: Re: mukti / djica X-To: lojban To: John Cowan Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1208 X-From-Space-Date: Fri Nov 7 17:56:36 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU What exactly is the difference between mukti and djica? To make the comparison easier let me re-order their argument places thus: djica: x3 is the purpose for which x1 wants that x2 happen. mukti: x1 is the motive which drives x3 to make x2 happen. The one difference that I seem to find at first sight is that {le djica} may or may not take part in {le se djica} event while {le te mukti} must take part in {le se mukti}. Is this really so, or am I restricting the use of mukti too much? We can say: mi djica le nu do klama le zarci kei le nu do te vecnu loi plise I want that you go to the market to buy some apples. But can we say: le nu do te vecnu loi plise cu mukti le nu do klama le zarci kei mi Your buying some apples motivates your going to the market as wanted by me. If the second one makes sense, then I don't really see the difference between djica and mukti, except for the trivial one about the order of the arguments. Is there a significant difference between purpose and motive? Is it a matter of tense, the motive having to occur before and the purpose after? If so, why do we need two words, can't we just use the tenses to show the sequence? co'o mi'e xorxes