Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0qIA44-00001oC; Mon, 27 Jun 94 09:21 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0769; Mon, 27 Jun 94 09:21:08 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 0765; Mon, 27 Jun 1994 09:14:56 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2517; Sat, 25 Jun 1994 02:41:20 +0200 Date: Fri, 24 Jun 1994 20:45:17 EDT Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: TECH: nunsucta sidbo X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 734 Lines: 19 la veion cusku di'e > > mi zmadu do le ka ke'a citka xokau plise > > > > I played with the same idea for a couple of days but there will be > conflicts: just add "poi mi te vecnu ke'a". Here the "ke'a" isn't quite > mandatory but there are cases where it cannot be avoided. The idea was > VERY tempting, though :-) That still doesn't create a conflict, as long as the ke'a applies to the nearest structure. The problem of nested {ke'a} already exists for subordinate clauses, and subindices have to be used (if anyone would ever want to complicate themselves to such an extent). Another possibility is to reserve a KOhA like ko'u or fo'u for this. I don't think anyone would miss them in their other function. mi'e xorxes