From jjllambias@hotmail.com Thu Jun 15 15:19:11 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21370 invoked from network); 15 Jun 2000 22:19:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Jun 2000 22:19:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.54) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Jun 2000 22:19:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 87515 invoked by uid 0); 15 Jun 2000 22:19:08 -0000 Message-ID: <20000615221908.87514.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.32.22.161 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:19:08 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.32.22.161] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Mi za'o klama Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:19:08 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la pier cusku di'e >Ru'a mi za'o klama la Painvil la Ralix. Without further context, my first interpretation is that you are still going from R to P even though one would expect that you no longer make that trip. For example, if you live in R and used to work in P but you no longer work there, then you may still be going from R to P every day, maybe you just can't shake the habit. Another possible context I can think of is this: the trip from R to P normally takes 20 minutes. You left R two hours ago but you run into a major trafic jam and so you are still stuck on the road. So you are still going from R to P, well past the natural ending point of the event. >Did I go past Pineville and wind up in >Rock Hill, or did I go all the way through Charlotte and find myself in >Pineville? I can't really get either of those meanings. If you went past Pineville, why would you say that you are still on your way to Pineville, or that you keep going there? It doesn't sound right to me. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com