sepi'o? lujvo?

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

Nick:
>I disagree.  I think the picture will be far messier for non-agentives;
>while such rafsi will exist, I'm sure, picking the right one will be
>more brain strain than it's worth, whereas {jai} will make life much
>easier.  I'd advocate leaving the jai-lujvo vague, and making
>meaningful-rafsi paraphrases the disambiguations for it.  As an example,
>do you feel comfortable saying {le rokci cu popyselpi'o le canko}?  What
>if the rock just fell, instead of being dropped?  For that matter, does
>{sepi'o} imply that a {le pilno} exists?  (I don't think so.  And this
>should be documented somewhere.)

Nora agrees with you that sepi'o does not imply le pilno; I am
ambivalent, siunce I habitually avoid deciding semantics issues outside
of context.  But I would say that le se pilno DOES imply le pilno, and
"selpi'o" in the lujvo you used is based on the selbri, not the BAI.

I would not feel comfortable with "le rokci cu popyselpi'o le canko" if
it 'just fell' (and just because of the illegal hyphen %^).  I wouldn;t
phrase it that way either, but rather something like "le rokci cu
popygre le canko" (not checking place structures, mind you - I prefer to
use my instincts when coining lujvo on the fly, and check when it really
matters).  Both lujvo of course beg the question as to whether it is the
rock or the window that shatters (or both).

>About time I did revisit that paper of mine, huh.  Ok, I'll see what I
>can do this January.

And don't forget umpteen bazillion new lujvo in your queue - with a host
more waiting in the wings based on Jorge and Goran and Chris's endless
conversation, I should guess %^).  What was that abotu 5 months email
backlog %^)?

lojbab