From araizen@newmail.net Sat Jul 21 16:31:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 21 Jul 2001 23:31:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 48203 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 23:30:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 21 Jul 2001 23:30:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n33.groups.yahoo.com) (10.1.2.114) by mta1 with SMTP; 21 Jul 2001 23:30:46 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: araizen@newmail.net Received: from [10.1.10.107] by ei.egroups.com with NNFMP; 21 Jul 2001 23:30:46 -0000 Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:30:45 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: kargu mleca Message-ID: <9jd3b5+fqog@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 752 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 62.0.182.48 From: "Adam Raizen" la xorxes cusku di'e > I don't like the way sisku is defined in the gismu list. Having > a place for the property and no place for the thing that has the > property sounds so strange (from a Lojbanic perspective) to me > that I can't bring myself to use such structure. Is there any > other gismu that shares this odd feature? This seems like "abstraction raising" to me. "ko'a sisku lo ka broda kei le klesi" means that ko'a is looking for something which has the property of broda-ness in the set, which should be able to be expressed by "ko'a sisku lo ckaji be lo ka broda kei le klesi" which is just the same as "ko'a sisku lo broda le klesi". In short, I don't see any reason not to put an object in the second place of sisku. mu'o mi'e adam