Re: TECH: more thoughts on zi'o

[Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>]

la'o gy Richard Kennaway gy cusku di'e

> It seems to me that if a place can be sensibly zi'o-ed, it doesn't belong
> in the definition at all.

I agree with a watered down version of this. If the zi'o-ed relationship
is useful enough, there is no need to restrict the concept with that place.
(i.e. we are in the presence of a "Fat Gismu" :)

However, there are occasions when a place can be sensibly zi'o-ed, and yet
the concept obtained is not quite what we want.

e.g. palci be zi'o, could mean "absolute evil", and there are people who
cosider this a sensible concept. We may not agree that something like that
exists, but the concept is not unthinkable. On the other hand, palci be zo'e
is a much more lojbanic concept. You can still talk about absolute evil in
Lojban, but you have to be more roundabout.

di'u mi se jinvi
co'o mi'e xorxes