Re: TECH: grammar updates

[C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK]

> > ta'o I had always read 'jenca' as meaning a physical shock, not an emotional
> > one.
>
> I'm not sure that this is a genuine difference.  In some ways, what happens
> to an organism when too much current passes through it is not that different
> from what happens to a (sentient) organism when it hears bad news --
> both are "physical".  I take it that the essential point is that x2 be
> an organism and not a wall or whatnot.

No, that's not what I meant. I think any physically organised system can
be physically shocked - an organism, a piece of equipment, a house of
cards, a wall - and whether the result is devastation or not depends on
the nature of the system and the shock.
An electric shock applied to an organism is to me a borderline application of
this - I would be much happier to see a lujvo.
An emotional (or intellectual) 'shock' seems to me to be a distinctly
metaphorical usage, and should be expressed by a tanru or lujvo.

>
> > It's a bit like 'sarji' which has long been used in both a figurative and
> > a literal sense. (cf your mail footer)
>
> Here the difference is probably in the x3 place.  The force against which
> Lojban is being supported is indifference (or the like) rather than gravity.

I recognise that the definition in the latest gimste allows that interpretation.
I think this is a mistake, again broadening a physical concept to include
a metaphorical extension (and I am further suspicious that this has been done
chiefly to legitimise 'ko sarji la lojban.').

        Colin
>
> > > 7)      le su'u la .iecuas. kuctra selcatra
> >                                               KEI
>
> Woops.
>
> --
> John Cowan      cowan@snark.thyrsus.com         ...!uunet!lock60!snark!cowan
>                         e'osai ko sarji la lojban.
>