[lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: zvati

[John E Clifford <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

--- Betsemes <betsemes@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > >I consider it purely locational too, it's
> just that I don't
> > > >accept that something that is not there
> can serve to indicate a
> > > >location. {bu'u le karce} means "at the
> location of the car", not
> > > >"at any location the car ever was or will
> be". {bu'u lo nu pu
> > > >salci} indicates the location where a
> party was held in the past,
> > > >not a location where, for example, at some
> point in the future, a
> > > >party will have been held in the past.
> >
> > Who wrote that, by the way?
> >
Don't ever ask directions in New England!  The
location is there in any case, it is only the way
the location is described that makes use of
references to other times -- yes, even the
future.  Thus, tense differences here don't make
the locational reference temporal.  To be sure,
we might want to locate things in 4-space and
then we would need some added devices (or new
combinations of what we have), but that does not
seem to be the problem here.