From sentto-44114-3522-963162383-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Sun Jul 09 17:04:26 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 19561 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2000 17:04:25 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2000 17:04:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 14998 invoked by uid 40001); 9 Jul 2000 17:06:28 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 14995 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2000 17:06:26 -0000 Received: from fj.egroups.com (208.50.144.72) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2000 17:06:26 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-3522-963162383-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.38] by fj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 09 Jul 2000 17:06:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 12102 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2000 17:06:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Jul 2000 17:06:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.240.154) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Jul 2000 17:06:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 4628 invoked by uid 0); 9 Jul 2000 17:06:22 -0000 Message-ID: <20000709170622.4627.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.42.153.98 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 09 Jul 2000 10:06:22 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.153.98] 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: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 10:06:22 PDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Opposite of za'o Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit la ivAn cusku di'e > > This is really the only sense in which a process "brings forth" > > the culmination event anyway, isn't it? > >No, it isn't. The process brings forth its culmination by causing it. I don't see it. The event of my building a house does not cause the event of culmination of my building a house. The culmination is just one part of the event, just as the initiation is another part. How can the whole physically cause one of its parts? > > >{pu'o -- co'a -- ca'o -- mu'o -- za'o -- co'u -- ba'o}. > > pu'o - co'a - xxx - xxx - ca'o - mu'o - za'o - co'u - ba'o > >Only if we start with the preconceived notion that {ca'o} is somehow >a more natural placing and then try to twist our analysis so as to >justify that. This is not what I'm interested in doing. The mirror >should go where the analysis reveals its place to be, whether it >looks natural or not. Ok, we're doing different things. You say: given the way Lojban ZAhOs are, we can arrange them so and explain them in terms of a mirror placed at {mu'o}. I'm saying that if we were constructing a system of aspects, it would be nice to exploit the full symmetry of placing a mirror at {ca'o}. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Free, Unlimited Calls Anywhere! Visit Firetalk.com - click below. http://click.egroups.com/1/5479/4/_/17627/_/963162383/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com