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 m0qpajg-00005IC; Tue, 27 Sep 94 13:30 EET
Message-Id: <m0qpajg-00005IC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 7530; Tue, 27 Sep 94 13:30:16 EET
Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 7526; Tue, 27 Sep 1994 13:30:16 +0200
Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE
 (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3346; Tue, 27 Sep 1994 12:27:23 +0100
Date:         Tue, 27 Sep 1994 07:28:52 -0400
Reply-To:     "Robert J. Chassell" <bob@GNU.AI.MIT.EDU>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         "Robert J. Chassell" <bob@GNU.AI.MIT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Missing from ref grammar
X-To:         cbogart@quetzal.com, lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
In-Reply-To:  <9409270508.AA28172@albert.gnu.ai.mit.edu> (message from Chris
              Bogart on Mon, 26 Sep 1994 19:39:12 -0600)
Content-Length: 485
Lines: 13

   I haven't been able to find a thorough discussion anywhere in the reference
   grammar about poi, noi, and ke'a. ...

These were discussed in drafts of the textbook in the days when things
were only distributed in hard copy, not electronically.  The only
electronic discussions that I know of are:

    9 Jul 1992,  from C.J.Fine@bradford.ac.uk, Relatives and Quantifiers

and

    11 Jun 91, from bob@gnu.ai.mit.edu, expanding BAI form, and
    related messages from lojbab et al.