From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Sep 13 17:16:56 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19524 invoked from network); 14 Sep 2000 00:16:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 14 Sep 2000 00:16:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.120) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Sep 2000 00:16:56 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 17:16:55 -0700 Received: from 200.42.119.91 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 00:16:55 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.119.91] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Eating glass, events ... Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 00:16:55 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Sep 2000 00:16:55.0990 (UTC) FILETIME=[172AC560:01C01DE1] From: "Jorge Llambias" la ivAn cusku di'e >The En word _hurt_ has as I see it at least five loosely related meanings: > >(a) `wound, make an opening in the skin'; >(b) `cause physical pain'; >(c) `have an adverse physical effect (perhaps in the long term)'; >(d) `have an adverse non-physical effect'; >(e) `cause non-physical pain'. I think {xrani} covers (a), (c) and (d). {xrani} is not directly related to pain, it is possible to be injured/harmed/damaged/wounded and not feel pain. (b) and (e) would be covered by {crogau}, {crori'a}. >I'd say (c) (and the contributor of the Bg translation on that page >thinks so too, although he has used a word that I consider obsolete >-- I don't use it, anyway). I checked the Spanish translation and there are two given, first one with the (b) sense and then one for (c), with the comment that (c) is probably more correct. I think I agree. It seems that to get the (b) meaning in English it should be "it doesn't hurt". "It doesn't hurt me" does seem to refer to harm more than to pain. > > mi ka'e citka loi blaci .i la'edi'u na xrani mi > >To my ears this sounds like `it doesn't wound me', and will do so until >I'm very explicitly told that it shouldn't. It shoudn't. :) >Perhaps it is the prominent >Russian participation (60% of the gismu hooking to _ran-_ `wound', which >can't mean either (b) or (c)). Looks like hooks can hook both ways. I wonder if Spanish "daņar" had a participation in {xrani} too. In any case, the x3 of xrani suggests that it can be any kind of damage, not only physical wounds, and it makes sense to take the more general sense anyway. >I suspect, however, that in Lojban {ka'e} may mean `be physically >able to commit the act, whatever the consequences', and if so, >{mi ka'e citka loi blaci} would seem trivially true. Yes, that's true. It seems that Michael's {e'e} would work much better. Except that I have got used to using {e'e} as an exhortative, for lack of anything better, so I read {e'e citka lo blaci} as "Eat glass, you can do it!" rather than the intended "I eat glass, I can do it!". Since all the other e-attitudinals are imperatives I think my use is justified. And some exhortative is necessary anyway. co'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.