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 m0qNkjh-000022C; Tue, 12 Jul 94 19:31 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3037; Tue, 12 Jul 94 19:30:11 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3034; Tue, 12 Jul 1994 19:30:10 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0516; Tue, 12 Jul 1994 18:29:23 +0200 Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 12:33:17 EDT Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: a simple question... X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 946 Lines: 35 la lojbab cusku di'e > > le karce cu bevri le dasni be le [] mapku le zarci > > The car carries the wearer of the hat to the store. > > At location [], > no'a = dasni > no'axire = bevri > > This is not exactly the most tested feature of the language, so arguments > for change can be considered (though we better hurry %^). You say that in {le dasni be le mapku pe le no'a}, no'a = dasni. What about in {le dasni be le mapku be le no'a} ? Is no'a = mapku here? Because that's the next outer selbri in this case. In the {pe} case, {pe} attaches to a closed sumti, but in the {be} case, {be} goes with the selbri. This explains why {le kansa be le le no'a speni} is the accompanier of their spouse, and {le catra be le no'a} is the killer of themselves. Couldn't we have {vo'a}, {vo'e}, etc to be {le no'a}, {le se no'a}, etc? This would make reflexives easy: le catra be vo'a the killer of him/herself > > lojbab > Jorge