From sentto-44114-3127-961193103-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Fri Jun 16 22:02:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 23910 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 22:02:20 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 22:02:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 28222 invoked by uid 40001); 16 Jun 2000 22:05:15 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 28217 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 22:05:15 -0000 Received: from b05.egroups.com (207.138.41.189) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 22:05:15 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-3127-961193103-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.35] by b05.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Jun 2000 22:05:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 14593 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 22:05:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 16 Jun 2000 22:05:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.88) by mta1 with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 22:05:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 4943 invoked by uid 0); 16 Jun 2000 22:04:59 -0000 Message-ID: <20000616220459.4942.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.42.152.150 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:04:59 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.152.150] To: lojban@egroups.com From: "Jorge Llambias" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@egroups.com; contact lojban-owner@egroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@egroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:04:59 PDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Mi za'o klama Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit la pycyn cusku di'e >I think the point is that Pineville still is the *destination* but not the >place he is going to end up -- at least unless he turns around. As long as Pineville is still considered as the destination, it seems all right. >Suppose he >stops off in Charlotte; his destination is still Pineville but he has >stopped >short of it and that is the (nearly mirror to za'o){mi co'u klama la >painvil >la ralix} or (more completely) {mi klama la painvil la ralix co'u la >carlyt} Yes! I agree with that {co'u} example. >If a person uses {za'o} in the original sentence then he is, admittedly, >continuing the same relation, but that relation does not depend on where he >ends up. Right, but it is clear that by using {za'o} he is not just making a locational description, "I went past Pineville". He is saying that he is still going to Pineville, that he keeps going to Pineville (whether he will eventually get there is not that important, but he is still on his way there). There is no strong clue to suggest that he went past it, that is only one of the possible unrealized completions so we would need to get that from some context. And only if he is planning on turning back would it make sense to me to use {za'o}. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Missing old school friends? Find them here: http://click.egroups.com/1/5534/3/_/17627/_/961193067/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com