From nicholas@uci.edu Fri Aug 24 03:17:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: nicholas@uci.edu X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 24 Aug 2001 10:17:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 85287 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2001 10:17:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Aug 2001 10:17:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO e4e.oac.uci.edu) (128.200.222.10) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Aug 2001 10:17:17 -0000 Received: from [128.195.186.34] (dialin53b-08.ppp.uci.edu [128.195.186.148]) by e4e.oac.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA25203 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 03:17:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: nicholas@e4e.oac.uci.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 03:21:18 -0700 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: A parable From: Nick Nicholas cu'u la .evgenis. >I am confused. Shouldn't it be {jinvi} instead of {pensi}? >Just a month ago, someone was reprimanded in a similar context. No. Here, I really do mean {pensi}. That's why I used the progressive in the English, which forces that interpretation. It's not holding an opinion, but cogitating. The parable would still work just as well with {jinvi le du'u}, though. Nick Nicholas, TLG, UCI, USA. nicholas@uci.edu www.opoudjis.net "Most Byzantine historians felt they knew enough to use the optatives correctly; some of them were right." --- Harry Turtledove.