From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Wed Oct 02 15:00:41 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 2 Oct 2002 22:00:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 54886 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2002 22:00:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Oct 2002 22:00:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailbox-14.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.114) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2002 22:00:40 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-67-58.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.67.58]) by mailbox-14.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5CCD49B16 for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2002 00:00:38 +0200 (DST) To: Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: paroi ro mentu [2] Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 23:02:17 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Jorge: > la and cusku di'e > > > If {pa roi ko'a} means, roughly, {pa roi ca ko'a} xor {ca ko'a > > pa roi}, doesn't that imply that the tag's relation to its own > > sumti is at the same level as its relation to its sister sumti? > > Roughly, yes. But the roughness is precisely at the point in > question. {paroi ca ko'a} means "once in the unspecified interval, > and coincident with ko'a". Now, it could well be that ko'a is the > unspecified interval, but consider a quantified case: > {paroiku ca ci da} that's "once in the unspecified interval, and > coincident with three things". The three things can't all be the > unspecified interval. But could they be portions of the unspecified interval? > > (What's the difference between 'rotate' and 'revolve'? I'm sure > > John will enjoy telling me...) > > The Earth rotates around its axis and revolves around the Sun. > > > > {ci djedi} cannot be the length of one occurrence, it is > > > three separate lengths. > > > > It is three separate lengths, but they can perfectly well be > > contiguous -- cf "I travelled just the once, on Monday, Tuesday, > > and Wednesday". > > That would require joining the days with {joi}. How come? It's true that "I travelled on Monday and I travelled on Tuesday and I travelled on Wednesday". But that's not entailed by "travelled on Mon joi tues joi Weds". > > So {re roi ci djedi cu klama} would mean "travel twice, each > > travelling occuring on each of three things of a day's duration". > > I think that has to be {re roi pa djedi be li ci}, one three-day > period, not three one-day periods. That means (on your story) "travel twice, there being exactly one travelling per three-day period". Probably the best way to get the meaning I gave is {re roi ca ci djedi}. > > > That's not how I'd read {ca ci djedi} -- I'd say it says something > > happens on day 1, day 2 and day 3, but not that it necessarily > > happens three times. E.g. {mi zvati la paris ca re djedi} is > > sensical if I went there for a weekend trip. > > It is sensical, but you're viewing it as two events: > > re da poi djedi zo'u mi zvati la paris ca da > > The property {mi zvati la paris ca ce'u} is said to hold for > exactly two values. {re da poi ke'a djedi se ka mi zvati la paris ca ce'u} is true. But {re da nu mi zvati la paris ca da poi ke'a djedi} is not necessarily true. Criteria for delimiting events are rather vague & (IMO) flexible. --And.