On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 08:56:41AM -0300, Jorge Llambías wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Robin Lee Powell
> <
rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 06:44:32PM -0300, Jorge Llambías wrote:
> >>
> >> The goal of catlu is viska, but it's possible to catlu and fail
> >> to viska.
> >
> > *chuckle*
> >
> > Come on, xorxes; we've been playing this game long enough that
> > you should know that you making a bare assertion like that isn't
> > good enough.
> >
> > Again: I see no evidence at all in the definitions that what you
> > just said is actually, ya know, *true*. How do you justify it?
> >
> > It would be really nice if, instead of making me drag the entire
> > chain of thought in your head out one link at a time, you would
> > generate the next 3 links or so and save us both some trouble.
>
> I just didn't think I was saying anything so remarkable.
As usual. :D> The first definition of "look" I find in
>
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/look is: "to turn one's
> eyes toward something or in some direction in order to see"
>
> If you think the relationship between "catlu" and "viska" is other
> than the relation between "look" and "see", or if you can find a
> more precise way to express that relation than with "troci",
> please do.
AFA*I*CT, catlu and viska are pure synonyms; that's why I asked.