From lojbab@xxxxxx.xxxx Fri Jan 29 04:23:38 1999 X-Digest-Num: 47 Message-ID: <44114.47.161.959273824@eGroups.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 07:23:38 -0500 From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" From: "Steven D. Arnold" >Are there any principles used in the defining of gismu? > >I was looking at "bajra," which means: > > x1 runs on surface x2 using limbs x3 with gait x4. > >It seems to me the gismu would be a lot more useful if it meant something >like: > > x1 runs for reason x2 at speed x3 using limbs x4 with gait x5. > >In fact, if "gait" could make the distinction between shuffling quickly, >jogging, running or sprinting, then maybe it should be x2. But the reason >for the running seems important; is it for exercize, training, a race? And >the speed parameter might also help us see if it's jogging, sprinting, etc. > >The limbs part seems less important, usually obvious from context -- if it's >a dog, it's on all four limbs, etc. > >The surface seems very unimportant to me. I don't know how others feel >about it, but it seems to me when you run, you often do so on many different >surfaces. > >So in the original gismu, it seems x2 and x3 are nearly or wholly >unimportant, and x4 could be better replaced with a speed parameter which is >both more specific and which conveys more meaning. > >To repeat, then, what are the principles that are used to define gismu? Why >form a gismu one way and not another? The given place structure was chosen partly for parallelism with cadzu (walk) which matches the first 3 places. The 4th place, the gait, is primarily useful for 4-legged animals, since bajra then encompasses trot and gallop. Certainly I would think that jogging and sprinting could be communicated via x4, but I am not sure what would go in the place for any of these. Originally, bajra and cadzu matched the place structure of klama. I'm surprised that you didn't ask about the destination. But we tried to minimize redundancy and someone pointed out that you can run in place. Which brings us to one answer to your question - speed in the sense of distance travelled per unit time is not important unless you are running to somewhere or on a route, and bajra doesn't necessarily imply such movement. If we put in speed, the physics types would want it to be a vector quantity and speed/velocity could apply to all movement predicates. In short, all this is a can of worms. Meanwhile, what kind of speed - how much movement across the terrain, or the rate at which the limbs are lifted, or the speed of said limbs through space (which I would guess is a harmonic variable in approximation). If someone runs on an exercise machine, what is the speed? The point being is that the running is a function of the limbs, not of the runner. And the nature of running is that it needs a reference against which the limb movement acts. That human beings only run on particular limbs is not inteded to be a limit on the concept. We certainly can walk on our hands or on all fours. lojbab