On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 08:29:04PM -0600, Jordan DeLong wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:57:20AM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> > la djorden cusku di'e
> > >I might agree if we were talking 'lakne' and not 'cumki'. But
> > >'cumki' is definitely too open ended, imho. However, I guess even
> > >'lakne' wouldn't be exactly the same (though a fair bit closer)---I
> > >can be able to do things which I'm not neccesarily likely to succeed
> > >at. I think 'able' just deals with a different accessability
> > >relation, and is only a similar in concept to 'cumki' and 'lakne'
> > >in that they all correspond to a <> of sorts.
> >
> > {lakne} would correspond to something like {so'emu'ei} or
> > {so'imu'ei}.
>
> Or just {su'omu'ei} with a different accessability relation.
To clarify more, the reason I would think the simpler explaination
of {so'emu'ei} may not suffice is that {so'emu'ei} is just based
on number of worlds, regardless of how 'far' they are from the real
world. One could either look at lakne as a different accessabilty
relation (which is an easy way), or as being the same but requiring
a certain number of the worlds which are within a certain 'distance'
from the real one.
Somesuch.
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
pgp00155.pgp
Description: PGP signature