From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Jul 05 18:57:09 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21614 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2000 01:57:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Jul 2000 01:57:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.113) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Jul 2000 01:57:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 3249 invoked by uid 0); 6 Jul 2000 01:57:08 -0000 Message-ID: <20000706015708.3248.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.32.23.94 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Wed, 05 Jul 2000 18:57:08 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.32.23.94] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Opposite of za'o Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 18:57:08 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la ivAn cusku di'e >I'm not quite sure I know what you mean by `mirror'. There is >a reason for the current asymmetry of even contours, and it is >the fact that causality works forward in time. I don't dispute that of course. What word should I use, "dual"? It is certainly a duality relationship, much like the relationship between "necessary" and "possible", or the relationship between "all" and "some", or between "and" and "or". In all of these we have X = 'not Y not' for some suitable use of 'not'. I understand X and Y to be duals, but I seem to recall someone objecting to this term in the past as well. >This is why a >process can have only one kind of beginning but two kinds of end, >or a total of three points that can define the contour (leaving >aside temporary pauses and resumptions): > >{co'a}: event brings forth process >{mo'u}: process brings forth event >{co'u}: event discontinues process > >There doesn't seem to be a vacancy for a fourth point. (Surely >it is not `process discontinues event', because events can't be >discontinued, they just happen. By `event' here I mean a point >event, also known as an achievement.) If we can make a distinction between "event discontinues process" and a "process brings forth event", I don't see why we can't distinguish "event brings forth process" from "process leaves event behind", distinguishing a mere circumstantial start from an actual birth or origination. > > >`Is dinner ready? -- No, it's still cooking.' > >What I'm trying to say is that the question (formulated as it is) >brings up a possible world in which completion has been attained, >thus either {ba'o broda} or {za'o broda} holds (depending on >whether the associated activity has been discontinued after having >brought about its culmination), and the answer states that in fact >it is {ca'o broda} that holds and {ba'o/za'o broda} do not. Ok, I see. Then "still" in this case indicates that the activity is occurring beyond the end point postulated by the question. An externally imposed culmination more than one intrinsic to the process. > > >I have washed the car, but I have not yet walked the dog. > > >i mi ba'o lumci le karce i ku'i mi pu'o dzugau le gerku > >It's the information structure (the location of the focus >of the utterance). What the Lojban is failing to say is >`... but as for {dzugau le gerku} [topic], I'm {pu'o} [focus] >that part'. In contrast to, that is, the {ba'o} in {ba'o >lumci le karce}; also in contrast to some other (hypothetical) >situation in which {ba'o dzugau le gerku}. Maybe the way to get that would be: i mi ba'o lumci le karce i mi pu'o ku'i dzugau le gerku co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com