From phma@oltronics.net Tue Jun 12 19:32:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 13 Jun 2001 02:32:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 41435 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2001 02:32:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Jun 2001 02:32:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO neofelis.ixazon.lan) (207.15.133.22) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Jun 2001 02:29:14 -0000 Received: by neofelis.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 500) id DD0703C5A9; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 22:18:58 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: phma@oltronics.net To: Subject: Re: [lojban] RE: zi'o and modals Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 22:14:46 -0400 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.29.2] Content-Type: text/plain References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01061222185812.01000@neofelis> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com From: Pierre Abbat On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Invent Yourself wrote: >This fundamentalism can be confining. People regularly use klama for >walking, but there really is no vehicle involved. If you want to get >surreal enough, and call a shoe a vehicle, then you can call a nonexistent >cap a sort of cap, just like zero is a number and black is a color, and >the null set is a set. How far should we take this? The gimste says "using means/vehicle x5", so legs are a means of going (gatram). BTW, Russian has distinct words for going (idti) and going by vehicle (yekhat'). To say "walk" specifically you say "idti peshkom" (apparently "peshok" means "foot" but is used only in this phrase). phma