Received: from mail-px0-f189.google.com ([209.85.212.189])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lojban-beginners+bncCOzcnrWBFBCA3JHfBBoEvvfUTA@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1OATV2-000399-Se; Fri, 07 May 2010 12:46:28 -0700
Received: by pxi13 with SMTP id 13sf346607pxi.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 07 May 2010 12:46:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received
         :received:received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received
         :sender:received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from
         :to:x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to
         :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        bh=qy4vzwsDXp7WQ42fMN0ki+VnLTPc50UXLW/DF6x4wd0=;
        b=j3jrXw3uvzGF8NO6oMFFVNL4cCLcxbyMSXU8Twk5XzIfzv7hMKY70lk4MQd99iZxcp
         81VwPjlkzygeILU0LO73O5br/68nhv/5subQcuyL4R6macGBkTEQWGG4h5BCRtsOtac7
         SuWhR4++s9hmqO1xYCFmfFOvN3+xuz2yXePBs=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references
         :date:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-authentication-results
         :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id
         :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe
         :content-type;
        b=GrwvG/xnEOgrogubBU0tQZDkl2bCMkY1mldC5N3X91XOysbNwsBwHfrcmyFbCJJ+Vg
         YYDgH6nVIf3jKjJENv+LmhBelCKW285D3QIF+dbhdJ4uw0710Sr+pMJHuto26sB1eFMy
         0Lw0/Z7SaUnZWHDf4A5ttiJ5tKU19OBikw3Aw=
Received: by 10.140.82.25 with SMTP id f25mr57373rvb.8.1273261568565;
        Fri, 07 May 2010 12:46:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.141.188.22 with SMTP id q22ls9210807rvp.1.p; Fri, 07 May 2010 
	12:46:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.140.57.11 with SMTP id f11mr24718rva.19.1273261567924;
        Fri, 07 May 2010 12:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.101.196.20 with SMTP id y20mr7040565anp.10.1273216402291;
        Fri, 07 May 2010 00:13:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.101.196.20 with SMTP id y20mr7040564anp.10.1273216402249;
        Fri, 07 May 2010 00:13:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f197.google.com (mail-qy0-f197.google.com [209.85.221.197])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id d7si3127233anb.1.2010.05.07.00.13.21;
        Fri, 07 May 2010 00:13:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of pascal.akihiko@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.197 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.221.197;
Received: by mail-qy0-f197.google.com with SMTP id 35so1299600qyk.15
        for <lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 07 May 2010 00:13:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.231.144 with SMTP id jq16mr4569910qcb.53.1273216400717; 
	Fri, 07 May 2010 00:13:20 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.229.1.222 with HTTP; Fri, 7 May 2010 00:13:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <n2h5715b9301005061234hd7e9b2bfwfda23db8e909f8f9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2035EAA2-54C5-4259-BC7C-497A1CA2A4F5@mac.com>
	 <n2r4de8c3931005020204vb8b15beckad10e4e0b8c59b71@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y2h702226df1005050645h34cd2c57ga3d005b1288e3ca7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <x2n4de8c3931005050728y7f43801fqff02cf14993da93b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <n2h5715b9301005061234hd7e9b2bfwfda23db8e909f8f9@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 May 2010 08:13:20 +0100
Message-ID: <j2h4de8c3931005070013n58e52e7bx7dfab5b676852cfa@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Proposed change to smart.fm items
From: tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com>
To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: 
	domain of pascal.akihiko@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.197 as permitted 
	sender) smtp.mail=pascal.akihiko@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) 
	header.i=@gmail.com
X-Original-Sender: pascal.akihiko@gmail.com
Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact 
	lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban-beginners.googlegroups.com>
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/post?hl=en_US>, 
	<mailto:lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban-beginners+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en_US>
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe?hl=en_US>, 
	<mailto:lojban-beginners+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe?hl=en_US>, 
	<mailto:lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00163630f43349784a0485fbcb43
Content-Length: 4738

--00163630f43349784a0485fbcb43
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 6 May 2010 20:34, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:

> hmmm.  So tijlan, you say that you see {lo plise} as being an implicit
> abstraction of the form {lo nu da plise}.  But then you say that it doesn't
> make sense to say {mi nelci lo plise} because {lo plise} is not an
> abstraction.  Pick a lane already  =p
>

I'm not saying that {mi nelci lo plise} doesn't make sense. I'm saying:

 1) the assumption that "an object and an event are different" does not
reflect what "an object" actually is

and therefore

 2) the assumption that some particular sumti should be *either* "an object"
or "a state" does not make sense.

Everything we perceive as "an object" is an event on its fundamental level.
"A hot apple" is an event of energy transfer between atoms/molecules, which
are themselves events of smaller particles/waves. We normally call it "an
object" because that's more natural and practical on the level of human
perception. So it's of course ok to say {mi nelci lo plise} as a human
expression. And there is no reason to exclude an event/abstract sumti for
{nelci}'s x2 on that account. The official definition of {nelci} does allow
"object/state" for its x2. But not for {djica}'s x2. Such a restriction
seems pointless. Since {lo plise} and {lo nu da plise} are semantically
identical, it seems even inappropriate to on one hand validate {mi djica lo
nu da plise} and on the other hand invalidate {mi djica lo plise}.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.


--00163630f43349784a0485fbcb43
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 6 May 2010 20:34, Luke Bergen <span dir=3D"lt=
r">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:lukeabergen@gmail.com">lukeabergen@gmail.com</a>&g=
t;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt =
0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex=
;">
hmmm. =A0So tijlan, you say that you see {lo plise} as being an implicit ab=
straction of the form {lo nu da plise}. =A0But then you say that it doesn&#=
39;t make sense to say {mi nelci lo plise} because {lo plise} is not an abs=
traction. =A0Pick a lane already =A0=3Dp<br>
</blockquote><div><br>I&#39;m not saying that {mi nelci lo plise} doesn&#39=
;t make sense. I&#39;m saying:<br><br>=A01) the assumption that &quot;an ob=
ject and an event are different&quot; does not reflect what &quot;an object=
&quot; actually is<br>
<br>and therefore<br><br>=A02) the assumption that some particular sumti sh=
ould be *either* &quot;an object&quot; or &quot;a state&quot; does not make=
 sense.<br><br>Everything we perceive as &quot;an object&quot; is an event =
on its fundamental level. &quot;A hot apple&quot; is an event of energy tra=
nsfer between atoms/molecules, which are themselves events of smaller parti=
cles/waves. We normally call it &quot;an object&quot; because that&#39;s mo=
re natural and practical on the level of human perception. So it&#39;s of c=
ourse ok to say {mi nelci lo plise} as a human expression. And there is no =
reason to exclude an event/abstract sumti for {nelci}&#39;s x2 on that acco=
unt. The official definition of {nelci} does allow &quot;object/state&quot;=
 for its x2. But not for {djica}&#39;s x2. Such a restriction seems pointle=
ss. Since {lo plise} and {lo nu da plise} are semantically identical, it se=
ems even inappropriate to on one hand validate {mi djica lo nu da plise} an=
d on the other hand invalidate {mi djica lo plise}.<br>
</div></div><div style=3D"visibility: hidden; display: inline;" id=3D"avg_l=
s_inline_popup"></div><style type=3D"text/css">#avg_ls_inline_popup {  posi=
tion:absolute;  z-index:9999;  padding: 0px 0px;  margin-left: 0px;  margin=
-top: 0px;  width: 240px;  overflow: hidden;  word-wrap: break-word;  color=
: black;  font-size: 10px;  text-align: left;  line-height: 13px;}</style>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
Lojban Beginners" group.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.<br =
/>
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@=
googlegroups.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
-beginners?hl=3Den.<br />



--00163630f43349784a0485fbcb43--