[lojban-beginners] Re: How versatile is "nu"?

[Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com>]

errr, lo'ai kukte sa'ai jukpa le'ai

I'm always mixing those up for some reason.

> "a man" itself is an abstraction/event of e.g. atoms forming molecules
> forming cells forming a biological male body; an event of "man-ing".
> So, when you see "a man", you are already seeing an event. When "a
> man" "runs", it's a combination of events, just like the event of
> hydrogen & rubber forming a balloon and the event of the balloon going
> up can combine.

I see what you're saying.  I think my understanding of "event" was just too narrow.

Thanks for clearing that up.

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:28 PM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:

On 13 March 2010 16:26, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So you object to:
>>
>>    mi viska lo nu lo nanmu cu bajra
>>
>> ?
> Good point.  I suppose I can't really object to that for practical reasons.
>  It just feels strange to me.  I understand myself to be seeing a man who is
> running as opposed to the event of running itself.

"a man" itself is an abstraction/event of e.g. atoms forming molecules
forming cells forming a biological male body; an event of "man-ing".
So, when you see "a man", you are already seeing an event. When "a
man" "runs", it's a combination of events, just like the event of
hydrogen & rubber forming a balloon and the event of the balloon going
up can combine.