From jjllambias@hotmail.com Thu Apr 13 08:05:03 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23405 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2000 15:05:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Apr 2000 15:05:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.174) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Apr 2000 15:05:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 5727 invoked by uid 0); 13 Apr 2000 15:05:02 -0000 Message-ID: <20000413150502.5726.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 12.128.6.202 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:05:02 PDT X-Originating-IP: [12.128.6.202] To: lojban@onelist.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Bringing it about that Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:05:02 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-eGroups-From: "Jorge Llambias" From: "Jorge Llambias" la pycyn cusku di'e [...] >I used to advocate a predicate "x1 brings >it about that event x2 by doing event x3." [...] >But there does seem to be a tendency to use gasnu in something like this >way >(or rather something like the original version, but without the third >place). I think I've always used {gasnu} in that way. What else could {gasnu} be used for? >This seems to turn up most in lujvo, where rafsi of gasnu turn up finally >whenever an activity or process is derived from a state predicate (loosely >speaking, since these are not hard concepts in Lojban). Yes, for example: la djan mrogau la djim John kills Jim. or: la djan gasnu le nu la djim morsi John brings it about that Jim be dead. Is there something wrong with this approach? >Even though literal >is not always best in lujvo (since not in tanru) and it is hard to make >rules >about the semantics of lujvo formation, this tendency is worrisome, given >the >history of, e.g., madzo (x1 makes x2 out of material x3) in Loglan, where >it >spread to something very close to "bring it about that" but then also >became >impersonal, beyond even English "make" and Fr. "faire" and so came to mean >very little at all (and nothing that could be traced back within Loglan to >its core meaning). But what does {gasnu} mean if not "bring it about that"? I admit that I also tend to use gasnu impersonally, but I don't see why that makes it lose its meaning, it seems a harmless extension: le cavbifckape cu mrogau la djim The storm killed Jim. It is certainly not {mukti}, and {rinka} seems a bit exreme. A heart attack or a gunshot might be causes of death, but a storm? co'o mi'e xorxes ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com