From jjllambias@hotmail.com Thu Oct 04 16:22:06 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 4 Oct 2001 23:19:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 45039 invoked from network); 4 Oct 2001 23:19:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by 10.1.1.220 with QMQP; 4 Oct 2001 23:19:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.137) by mta1 with SMTP; 4 Oct 2001 23:22:06 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 16:22:06 -0700 Received: from 200.41.247.59 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 04 Oct 2001 23:22:06 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.41.247.59] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: translation exercise Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 23:22:06 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Oct 2001 23:22:06.0434 (UTC) FILETIME=[61E3DC20:01C14D2B] From: "Jorge Llambias" la jrc cusku di'e >Apparently "before" is ambiguous in that it can signal preemption, or >temporal precedence, or both. I think the preemption is not really a part of "before". If you say that X happens before any Y happens, and it is in the nature of X that its happening prevents Y from happening, then naturally X happening before Y preempts Y from happening. But this only works when we already know that X will prevent Y, and it is just a consequence of the temporal precedence. If the meaning of preemption was part of "before", then you should be able to say "X before Y" meaning that X preempts Y when normally X would not preempt Y. Can you think of any such case? mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp