From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Feb 20 07:45:21 2000 X-Digest-Num: 369 Message-ID: <44114.369.2049.959273826@eGroups.com> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 07:45:21 PST From: "Jorge Llambias" Subject: Re: Re: Translation needed > > I don't know whether spofu/nalspofu/tolspofu can be used > > for people as well as for machines, but I don't see why > > not. "zukte" has the additional burden of intention, > > which I didn't think was there in "function at even a basic > > level". > >You could always use 'gasnu'. I thought that 'function' referring to >people implied some kind of intention, but maybe not. I may be misunderstanding the English. I interpreted "function at even a basic level" as things like being able to walk, stay awake, mainly physiological well being, the body-machine in working order. Does it mean more than that? >spofu/tolspofu, OTOH, implies that the x1 is merely a tool and not >and agent, and I think that 'function' definitely implies that the >functioner is somehow an agent. I interpret it as "in working order/capable of fullfilling its functions", basically very similar to "healthy" when referring to people. A related question, can {kanro} be used for machines? co'o mi'e xorxes ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com