[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lojban-beginners] Re: ti/ta/tu, zo'e, da

On 8/17/06, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/17/06, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/17/06, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 8/17/06, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > .i lo munje puzuki citno .i ro cmana cazu crino
> >
> > {ro cmana cabu'u crino} right? You have already fixed the
> > reference place with {ki}, so a new {zu} will take you away from
> > there.
>
> "ca" by
> itself would work as well, but would might imply a close proximity of
> the two events, which I was trying to avoid by saying they're only
> relatively proximate: something like "at the same time, which in the
> context of these long time periods could be anywhere in a long time
> period", or in other words, "in the same long time period". "caza"
> would perhaps be better.

{ca} only indicates simultaneity, it does not say anything about the
duration of the two events. In this case the two events (the two states)
would seem to be simultaneous.

{za} indicates that the two events are separated by some (medium)
length of time.


I was trying to use "cazu" or "caza" to mean "simultaneous to within X
time period", where X is za or zu. For instance, in certain context
things are only simultaneous if they happen within a few nanoseconds
of each other. In other contexts, that can be seconds, hours, years,
or eons. Does "caza" not work for indicating that scope? I realize
that "ca" by itself allows that leeway in simultaneity, but is there a
way to make it explicit?


Relative to the first. {nau ki} is absolute and brings you to the here
and now..

I don't think you can unstick the reference without sticking it somewhere
else. {ki nai} should be grammatical but isn't.


ki'e

Chris Capel
--
"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)