Re: gasnu

[Pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 11/8/99 11:38:45 AM CST, robin@Bilkent.EDU.TR writes:

<< Yes, according to the definition of {mukti}:
 
 x1 (action/event/state) motivates/is a motive/incentive for
 action/event x2, per volition of x3 
 
 I'm not quite sure what the third place is meant to be, though.>>

I suppose that the1>3 conversion of mukti would do nicely for the original 
sentence then (thanks for the note; as usual, I can''t find my gismu list to 
get place structures
right and have to rely on ancient versions).
 
 <<To have a person in the x1 would give them a magical power to
 reach inside someone's head and motivate them directly, which,
 pending further developments in parapsychology, we can safely
 ignore.>>
Interesting interpretation!  But note: it would still be the act -- however 
an odd one -- that did the work.
  
 <<Sumti-raising is less the first line of defence than a dirty hack
 to get out of the problem!>>
Not really.  It is a regular feature of the grammars of all the languages I 
know (not a huge list, to be sure, but fairly diverse).  Lojban's only 
peculiarity is that it marks the feature explicitly rather than by 
implication -- either lexically or by paradox -- and that change is required 
by the claim to be a logical language.
 
 <<Coercive acts set up a situation in which someone is
 motivated - albeit extremely strongly - to react in a certain
 way.  The only time one could use {rinka} is if someone
 physically forces the other persons body to move in a particular
 way.  As John Cowan pointed out off-list, in this case it would
 mean you grab the persons hand and slap yourself with it. >>
Another interesting interpretation, though clearly sustainable.  What about 
the electrode planting technique, where arm motion, for example, is induced 
by throwing some switches, with no motivation involved?  Addiction?  And so 
on through the whole list of unwilling behaviors?

pc