From nicholas@uci.edu Fri Jul 13 05:16:40 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: nicholas@uci.edu X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 13 Jul 2001 12:16:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 94823 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 12:16:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Jul 2001 12:16:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO e4e.oac.uci.edu) (128.200.222.10) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Jul 2001 12:16:34 -0000 Received: from [128.195.186.17] (dialin53c-64.ppp.uci.edu [128.195.187.74]) by e4e.oac.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA23517 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 05:16:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: nicholas@e4e.oac.uci.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 04:43:10 -0700 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Looking down From: Nick Nicholas Your assembled wit & wisdom is requested again, listmembers. Arnt has pointed out to me that {mo'ini'u catlu le kabri} is not a good rendering of "looked down at her cup", since it is not clear what exactly is 'moving downwards'. I think the eyeballs can be sensibly inferred as moving down, and that when you don't have an overt predicate of motion involved, you should be able to exert common sense (implicature) in determining what it is that moves. But then again, is this simply a sense of directionality, so that {ni'u catlu le kabri} is enough? So which is it? Is {[mo'i]ni'u catlu le kabri} acceptable Lojban? And more importantly, is it acceptable in the Lessons? Nick Nicholas, TLG, UCI, USA. nicholas@uci.edu www.opoudjis.net "Most Byzantine historians felt they knew enough to use the optatives correctly; some of them were right." --- Harry Turtledove.