[lojban-beginners] Re: zvati

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On 6/13/05, Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
> I disagreed that zvati was purely locational, because of the way the
> English was written.  I have been convinced that the intention was
> locational, and have updated jbovlaste to reflect this.

I think describing {zvati} as "atemporal" confuses things 
more than anything. Are you going to add "atemporal"
to {zunle}, {crane}, {sruri}, {snanu}, and all other spatial
relationships too? 

Compare:

    abu crane by
    A is in front of B.

   abu zunle by
   A is to the left of B.

   abu sruri by
   A is around B.

   abu snanu by
   A is south of B.
   
   abu zvati by
   A is at B.

Are all of these "atemporal"? All of them describe relative 
positions, but normally they describe simultaneous positions.
If I want to say that A is left of where B was, or in front of
where B was, or around of where B was, or south of where 
B was, then that requires a more elaborate description. 
Then A is not left/in front/around/south of/at B, but rather
it is related to a place where B was.
 
Spatial relationships assume that the two things being 
compared are there at the same time. {zvati} is not special
in this regard, so if you describe it as "atemporal" all the
others would be atemporal too.

mu'o mi'e xorxes