Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 12:38:20 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199712151738.MAA02315@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: Carl Burke Sender: Lojban list From: Carl Burke Subject: Re: whether (was Re: ni, jei, perfectionism) X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 741 X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec 15 12:38:22 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU At 04:44 PM 12/15/97 GMT+0, And Rosta wrote: ... >> mi zanru le du'u melbi >> >> I approve of the fact that (something is) beautiful. > >No. "I approve of the proposition that something is beautiful". > >"the fact that" is better rendered by "le nu". So 'the fact that' is explicitly transient? From descriptions and usage, I would expect an unlabeled bridi to be a 'fact': {mi jmive} "I live/lived/will live", and abstractions to be modifications or different aspects of that fact ({le nu mi jmive} "My living/lifetime" or {le mu'e mi jmive} "My coming-to-life"). Is 'nu' now polysemous between 'an actual fact' and 'an event or [transient] state'? Has the language mutated that drastically in ten years? -- Carl Burke cburke@mitre.org