Re: [lojban] state of {binxo}

[tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com>]

2011/12/5 Felipe Gonçalves Assis <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>:
> coi
>
> Is there a consensus about the nature of binxo2? I mostly see
> non-properties there, but I am not sure how to interpret that.
>
> I noticed that there was some discussions on the subject long ago,
> but I didn't find any conclusion in favour of the object-object version
> of {binxo}.

coi .asiz.

It's clear at least to me that binxo1 and binxo2 are not attributive
properties and are related in terms of cenba2. binxo1 corresponds to
cenba1. While {cenba} expresses a change of the x1 in some property
and makes no reference to the resulting entity, {binxo} does say what
the x1 transforms into but without specifying the properties in which
the change occurs.

{binxo} is also comparable to {galfi}. binxo1 & binxo2 correspond to
galfi2 & galfi3:

ri'a lo nu lenku kei lo djacu cu binxo lo bisli

lo nu lenku cu galfi lo djau lo bisli


mu'o mi'e .tijlan.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.