Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 15 Oct 1993 13:47:09 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 15 Oct 1993 13:46:47 -0400 Message-Id: <199310151746.AA10274@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4743; Fri, 15 Oct 93 13:44:51 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1782; Fri, 15 Oct 93 13:46:56 EDT Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 13:43:44 EDT Reply-To: Jorge LLambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge LLambias Subject: Re: TEXT: nu la nunmorsi catlu X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Fri Oct 15 09:43:44 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET la nitcion cusku di'e > # .i mi penmi la nunmorsi le mi purdi ca le cerni > > A funny thought occured to me. In eliding anaphora, Japanese and Chinese > are inferential languages --- you have to work out, aided by convention, > who's doing what. In eliding tense information, as is done here, Lojban > is doing the same. I wonder if this will be considered good style, once > Lojban settles down, or whether {le ba cerni} would be preferred. {le ba cerni}?? I thought it meant "this morning", and later Death talks about "this evening". It seems natural to assume that they are talking about the morning and evening of that day. I don't see why it would be {le ba cerni}. Jorge