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 m0qpSDM-000024C; Tue, 27 Sep 94 04:24 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3521; Tue, 27 Sep 94 04:24:30 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3518; Tue, 27 Sep 1994 04:24:27 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8501; Tue, 27 Sep 1994 03:21:33 +0100 Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 19:39:12 -0600 Reply-To: Chris Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris Bogart Subject: Missing from ref grammar X-To: lojban@cuvmb.bitnet To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 651 Lines: 12 I haven't been able to find a thorough discussion anywhere in the reference grammar about poi, noi, and ke'a. The difference between poi and noi is used as an analogy to something else (pe and ne? I don't remember now) so they do get mentioned, but never explicitly introduced, despite the claim that they are "described in more detail elsewhere". I know there are papers yet to be written, so if this is already scheduled for coverage in one of them, then never mind. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Chris Bogart cbogart@quetzal.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~