From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Wed May 12 07:49:34 1993 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 12 May 1993 15:23:10 -0400 Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3969; Wed, 12 May 93 15:22:34 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 0681; Wed, 12 May 93 15:23:28 EDT Date: Wed, 12 May 1993 11:49:34 -0400 Reply-To: lock60!snark!cowan@GVLS1.VFL.PARAMAX.COM Sender: Lojban list Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was cowan@GVLS1.VFL.PARAMAX.COM From: lock60!snark!cowan@GVLS1.VFL.PARAMAX.COM Subject: Re: TECH: xo'e X-To: lojbab@grebyn.com To: Erik Rauch In-Reply-To: <9305111913.AA25480@relay1.UU.NET> from "Logical Language Group" at May 11, 93 03:10:52 pm Message-ID: la lojbab. cusku di'e > We discussed the xo'e proposal at Lojban conversation group last night, and > Nora finally got a chance to hear about it. She was underwhelmed, to say > the least. She pointed out that xo'e phraseology is not useful in creating > a lujvo incorporating the altered semantics that one seeks by using it. Absolutely true. Since xo'e modifies the selbri, it would be better if it were >in< the selbri: this can be achieved with a linked argument of the form "be FA xo'e". This doesn't help with lujvo (discussion below omitted) but does allow the construction of tanru: la'e zoi gy. The Stars My Destination gy. cu klama befuxo'e cfika -- John Cowan cowan@snark.thyrsus.com ...!uunet!lock60!snark!cowan e'osai ko sarji la lojban.