Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 16 Feb 1994 08:13:43 -0500 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 16 Feb 1994 08:13:38 -0500 Message-Id: <199402161313.AA04685@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5859; Wed, 16 Feb 94 08:11:46 EST Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 6677; Wed, 16 Feb 94 08:12:35 EDT Date: Wed, 16 Feb 1994 13:12:02 GMT Reply-To: Colin Fine Sender: Lojban list From: Colin Fine Subject: Re: Place structures with {co} To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Ukn Feb 16 15:56:47 1994 X-From-Space-Address: C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK To answer Jorge: While your argument over following places has some merit, I don't think it is compelling. First, the argument from the parse is inconclusive - it treats the selbri as a unit. Secondly, the primary purpose of this construction is to bring the seltanru to the end specifically to make its tergismu available. To use it simply to invert the terms without seeking this effect would be a subtle stylistic effect only, and not in my view sufficiently important to provide specially. You furthermore say: ++++++> We need a convention for what {vo'a}, {vo'e}, etc. mean when used in a bridi whose selbri is a co-type tanru. I vote for them to refer to the tertanru places only, and not to the unmeritoriously :) promoted places of the seltanru. Also, what are the places of {go'i} and co. when refering to that bridi? I also think they should be only those of the tertanru. >+++++ I don't agree. As I think is suggested by my argument above, I think these gernybasti should take the entire selbri as it stands, and interpret the tergismu accordingly. Colin