* Monday, 2011-12-05 at 13:15 -0300 - Felipe Gonçalves Assis <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>:
> 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}.
I don't know what sense object-object binxo might make. But for the
meaning "x1 starts to have property x2", we can be more explicit by
using {kaicfa}. This also gets rid of the pesky "under conditions x3"
place of {binxo}.
The Lynchian Mentat mantra, as an example:
mi zu'e po'o tolcadgau le mi menli i
ri'a tu'a le jisra be la safus le pensi kantu cu kaicfa le ka sutra i
le ctebi cu kaicfa le ka se barna i
le barna cu kaicfa le ka kajde i
mi zu'e po'o tolcadgau le mi menli
(original:
It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the juice of Sapho that thoughts acquire speed,
the lips acquire stains,
the stains become a warning.
It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
)
Martin
Attachment:
pgpcwcf9qaJAw.pgp
Description: PGP signature