From araizen@newmail.net Sat Sep 23 16:36:27 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_0_2); 23 Sep 2000 23:36:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 31907 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2000 23:36:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 23 Sep 2000 23:36:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO out.newmail.net) (212.150.51.26) by mta3 with SMTP; 23 Sep 2000 23:36:25 -0000 Received: from default ([62.0.182.83]) by out.newmail.net ; Sun, 24 Sep 2000 02:37:48 +00:00 To: lojban@egroups.com Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 02:46:48 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: coercion Reply-to: araizen@newmail.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Message-ID: <96978826901@out.newmail.net> From: "Adam Raizen" I don't think that "bapli" works for the kind of coercion involved in rape. Both the x1 and x2 of "bapli" are abstractions. A nu bapli could easily occur involving only inanimate objects, e.g. "le ka le solri cu dirce cu bapli le ka le djacu cu febvi". I think that coercion needs "djica" in it somewhere, probably in the form "naldji". Maybe "naldji gletu" cei naldjigle to ta'u vo'a gletu lo naldji to be le nu vo'a gletu vo'e toi toi I'm not so sure what the difference between "bapli" and "rinka" is. Maybe "bapli" could apply, for example, in logical or philosophical systems where "rinka" wouldn't. co'o mi'e adam