Re: xruti

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

la lojbab cusku di'e

> So there are two features that distinguish trhe current xruti from krefu.
> You seem to propose eliminating one of them.

There are at least two other features that distinguish them:

krefu has a repetition number. This means that the emphasis is on the
repetition of a bridi relationship, rather than the re-establishment of
a broken relationship.

xruti has a place for the "back from", which emphasizes that there was
a different relationship holding while the original one was not.

> Now the question becomes whether a -gau lujvo adds an agent while preserving
> the focus on the x1 place.  I find this doubtful.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. In xrugau (with the new xruti) the thing
returning to a previous state is in x2, just as in the old xruti. The meaning
of xrugau would be identical to what xruti is now, by definition of gasnu.

On the other hand, it is not easy to form a lujvo for "x1 returns to state x2"
with the current xruti, because {se'ixru} has other connotations ("x1 returns
itself to state x2", the return doesn't just happen.)

> Somewhere in all this, my mind is drawn to stika/cenba and galfi/binxo as
> being more relevant than gasnu tot his question.

stika and galfi are described as agentive, but they seem to require an event
in x1, so I'm not sure how they could replace gasnu.

> So I will stop now and reiterate that Nick needs to comment based on his
> understandings on the semantics of the gismu as they seem to be being used in
> lujvo, as well as from his experience as the most prolific and fluent
 Lojbanist.

Would it be too much trouble to post the appearances of xru in the new bunch
of lujvo? There can't be that many of them. I bet most would be like xrukla,
that make more sense with an agentless xruti. (Or better yet, is Nick's new
lujvo list available for examination?)

Jorge