X-Digest-Num: 279 Message-ID: <44114.279.1555.959273825@eGroups.com> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 11:07:56 EST From: Pycyn@aol.com Subject: Re: gasnu X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 1555 Content-Length: 1939 Lines: 47 In a message dated 11/8/99 11:38:45 AM CST, robin@Bilkent.EDU.TR writes: << Yes, according to the definition of {mukti}: x1 (action/event/state) motivates/is a motive/incentive for action/event x2, per volition of x3 I'm not quite sure what the third place is meant to be, though.>> I suppose that the1>3 conversion of mukti would do nicely for the original sentence then (thanks for the note; as usual, I can''t find my gismu list to get place structures right and have to rely on ancient versions). <> Interesting interpretation! But note: it would still be the act -- however an odd one -- that did the work. <> Not really. It is a regular feature of the grammars of all the languages I know (not a huge list, to be sure, but fairly diverse). Lojban's only peculiarity is that it marks the feature explicitly rather than by implication -- either lexically or by paradox -- and that change is required by the claim to be a logical language. <> Another interesting interpretation, though clearly sustainable. What about the electrode planting technique, where arm motion, for example, is induced by throwing some switches, with no motivation involved? Addiction? And so on through the whole list of unwilling behaviors? pc