Re: xanka

[jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU]

> Put more plainly perhaps, I have heard people referred to as being
> happy, with no implication that they were "happy about something".

Then you wouldn't use {gleki} that does have an "about" place?

> Whereas I cannot think of a situation where "anxious" did not imply
> "anxious about something".

But I wasn't complaining about the "about" place. I was complaining
about the "under circumstances" place.

> The inclusion of a condition place on xanka means
> that it is inherent to the nature of anxiety that it is tied to
> conditions.

Right. I see no reason why it should be more inherent for xanka
than for gleki, that's all. Of course, you can put all kinds of
metaphysical biases in the definitions, but to me it seems like an
arbitrary complication.

Jorge