Re: sarji

> After
>        all, we (no longer, anyhow) think that the English "support" in
>        this context is figurative at all, so why should we in the case
>        of _sarji_?  On the other hand, _sarji_ is a fundamental word of
>        the language and a part of the design was to make those pretty
>        sharp-edged to allow for a freer metaphor development.

This question has arisen before.  "sarji" is a relation between a
"support" and a "supported", with x3 as an opposing force or opposition
needing support against (and x4 as a means of support).  Given this set
of places, it should be clear that support is not necessarily limited
to support in a gravitational well, and indeed most "metaphorical"
usages of "support" fit the place structure quite nicely.  The kinds of
usages that really need to be marked as metaphorical, are those in which
one or more of the implicatures of the place structure are violated.

lojbab
Cc: lojban