From xod@sixgirls.org Thu Sep 06 19:47:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@reva.sixgirls.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_1); 7 Sep 2001 02:47:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 75933 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 02:47:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Sep 2001 02:47:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO reva.sixgirls.org) (64.152.7.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Sep 2001 02:47:29 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by reva.sixgirls.org (8.11.6/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f872lM517551 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:47:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:47:22 -0400 (EDT) To: Subject: RE: [lojban] li'i (was: Another stab at a Record on ce'u In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, And Rosta wrote: > Xod: > > > > I see what you're saying. But the li'i needs a focus. Are you suggesting > > > > we bust out yet another cmavo rather than use ce'u in li'i? > > > > > > The li'i doesn't always need a focus: {le li'i da carvi kei be mi} = > > > my experience of it raining. > > > > How can you experience it raining? Are you experiencing {li'i ce'u carvi}, > > being rain? Or being rained upon (li'i carvi ce'u}? Or being a something > > cloud-like, that generates rain {li'i carvi fi ce'u}? Pissing out of a > > window is part of the carvi experience just as much as getting dripped on > > from an air conditioner. Without ce'u, only flimsy contextual clues > > provide the data. > > You may be right. But we can certainly say {mi lifri lo nu da carvi}, I experience the event that something is rain. I suppose since carvi1 is taken, the phantom ce'u must be in other place, or a BAI place. But it needs to be there somewhere. > without specifying the exact way I was involved in or impinged on by > it raining. And for many experiences it's hard to be precise: e.g. > my experiences of the Northern Ireland conflict -- which are largely > indirect but very multifarious and multitudinous. > > > So "my experience of me belching" should > > > be {le li'i mi kafke kei be mi}, not {le li'i ce'u kafke kei be mi}. > > > > Next you'll declare the second mi redundant and try to get away with {li'i > > mi kafke}. > > No, not at all. I don't deny that there must be an experiencer. I just > strongly question whether the experiencer must be involved in the > experience bridi. How can I experience a bridi if I am not in one of its places? ----- "We should destroy the Muslims' homes while leaving the Christians' homes alone." -- Rehavam Zeevi, Israeli Tourism Minister