re'o vs ne'a
tijlan
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Contact+Spatial
re'o (FAhA3)
Adjacent to. Indicates that something is adjacent, touching or
contacting. When tagging a sumti, the sumti indicates something which
it is adjacent to, touching or contacting. See also: te'e.
Keywords: adjacent, abutting.
ne'a (FAhA3)
Indicates that something is adjacent. When tagging a sumti, the sumti
indicates something which it is next to.
Keywords: adjacent. next to. approximating.
Both mean adjacency. The contrasting keywords are "abutting / touching
/ contacting" versus "next to / approximating". This implies the
following:
da pe re'o de
X which is adjacent to and on contact with Y
da pe ne'a de
X which is adjacent to and not on contact with Y
Questions:
Why should "ne'a" belong to the "Contact Spatial" category?
How is "ne'a" different from the traditional "vi"?
mu'o
Jorge Llambías
>
> Why should "ne'a" belong to the "Contact Spatial" category?
The section is not very well named. The only one that really requires
contact from that section is "re'o". And most of the FAhAs not in that
section allow contact as well.
> How is "ne'a" different from the traditional "vi"?
One difference is that "mo'i ne'a" is grammatical but "mo'i vi" is not.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
djandus
Jorge Llambías
> doi xorxes
> What would that mean, exactly? That is:
>
> mi mo'i ne'a tu klama
> mi klama tu
> are those equivalent?
"klama tu" says that "tu" is my destination, but I may be going there
in a roundabout way so that that is not the direction in which I'm
going.
"mo'i ne'a tu" says that there is movement towards a place near "tu".
> The other FAhA3 make a lot of sense to me as
> directions (mostly because their definitions include one, like "into" or
> "passing through") but I wonder about some... do all FAhA3 have the
> direction of "towards [sumti]", with distintions between "passing through",
> "contacting", "edging up to", and "into"? And if so, then what do {ne'a} and
> {bu'u} mean as directions?
"mo'i bu'u ko'a" indicates there's movement towards the place where "ko'a" is.
I don't think "mo'i" is much use. We already have "fa'a" to indicate
direction, and movement is usually indicated by the selbri. It's very
rare that you need to add the idea of movement to a selbri that
doesn't already have it.
Pierre Abbat
> I don't think "mo'i" is much use. We already have "fa'a" to indicate
> direction, and movement is usually indicated by the selbri. It's very
> rare that you need to add the idea of movement to a selbri that
> doesn't already have it.
What about "mo'i ru'u ka'argau lo sluni"? I cut them parallel to the veins, a
layer or two at a time; they last longer that way.
Pierre
--
sei do'anai mi'a djuno puze'e noroi nalselganse srera
Jorge Llambías
>
> What about "mo'i ru'u ka'argau lo sluni"? I cut them parallel to the veins, a
> layer or two at a time; they last longer that way.
"ka'argau" means "x1 makes x2 cut x3", right?
Does "mo'i ru'u" mean "moving around" or "moving towards the surroundings of"?
Are you describing the movement of the blade, or the movement of the
onion? Isn't it easier to rotate the onion rather than move the blade
around it?
Pierre Abbat
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Pierre Abbat <ph...@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
> > What about "mo'i ru'u ka'argau lo sluni"? I cut them parallel to the
> > veins, a layer or two at a time; they last longer that way.
>
> "ka'argau" means "x1 makes x2 cut x3", right?
Yes, that should be "ka'argau fi lo sluni", but I think I originally
wrote "katna lo sluni", though I use a knife.
> Does "mo'i ru'u" mean "moving around" or "moving towards the surroundings
> of"?
I looked through a few sections of chapter 10 and didn't find enough examples
to decide that. Another possible interpretation would be that a group of
children start in one place and move until they surround the school.
> Are you describing the movement of the blade, or the movement of the
> onion? Isn't it easier to rotate the onion rather than move the blade
> around it?
I rotate the onion, but I'm describing the movement of the blade in the
onion's frame of reference.