Re: The design of Lojban

[JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

And:
>> Lojbab has said that he sometimes sees people as events, so
>> event Lojbab may yet happen to defend it.  :)
>I agree with Lojbab here (always surprises me when that happens).
>To my mind, restricting a tersumti to a nu serves only to exclude
>abstract objects like numbers, ka, du`u, and so on.

Well, I may agree with you. I don't agree that you can have
{le nu broda cu prenu} = "the event of brodaing is a person"
or {lo prenu cu fasnu} = "some person happens". In other
words, {lo'i prenu} and {lo'i fasnu} are disjoint sets. But I do
agree that in general, you can have places that can
be filled both with events and with people:

                mi viska do e le nu do klama le zarci
                I see you and your going to the market.

{le se viska} can equally well be a person or an event.
It is not clear to me why a {bandu} has to be only an event.

>Colin Fine once did a systematic study of the ontological
>nature of each tersumti of each gismu. I would like to look
>this up. Would anyone happen to know whether it is archived,
>and how one might find it?

Did he ever actually do the study? I remember his discussions
of the categories he would use, but I don't know whether he
actually went ahead with it.

 co'o mi'e xorxes