Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by nfs2.digex.net with SMTP id AA18889
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>); Sun, 27 Nov 1994 17:18:48 -0500
Message-Id: <199411272218.AA18889@nfs2.digex.net>
Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 8133; Sun, 27 Nov 94 17:19:47 EST
Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3588; Sun, 27 Nov 1994 17:19:47 -0500
Date:         Sun, 27 Nov 1994 17:21:05 EST
Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: lo + opaque
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@access.digex.net>
Status: RO
X-From-Space-Date: Sun Nov 27 17:18:50 1994
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu

And:
> I support the "xehe" that pc proposes, but I think it would be useful
> to have a complementary camvo, "xoho", say, that marks a sumti as
> a NON-leaper. It would be an overt way of showing that we have not
> inadvertently forgotten to insert a "xehe" or to use an initial
> "da poi ... zohu".

Surely xo'o should be xe'enai. But wait a minute, don't use xe'e for
this new proposal, it is not the xe'e I proposed, so it should have
another name, at least to keep the confusion at a manageable level.
Let's say xa'a, if I may suggest one.

> As far as I am aware, there are no other proposals still floating around
> for opacity solutions, so comment can focus on "lohe", "xehe" [a la pc],
> and "xoho".

Let's see if I understand correctly:


        "I need a box"

pc:     mi nitcu le nu lo tanxe cu co'e         (opaque)
        mi nitcu tu'a lo tanxe                  (opaque)
        mi nitcu le nu xa'a lo tanxe cu co'e    (transparent)
        mi nitcu tu'a xa'a lo tanxe             (transparent)
        mi nitcu lo tanxe  [tu'a xa'a cancel each other] (transparent)

And:    mi nitcu le si'o lo tanxe cu co'e       (opaque)
        mi nitcu tu'a lo tanxe                  (opaque)
        mi nitcu le si'o xo'o lo tanxe cu co'e  (opaque)
        mi nitcu tu'a xo'o lo tanxe             (opaque)
        mi nitcu le si'o xa'a lo tanxe cu co'e  (transparent)
        mi nitcu tu'a xa'a lo tanxe             (transparent)

Jorge:  mi nitcu lo'e tanxe                     (opaque)
        mi nitcu xe'e lo tanxe                  (opaque)
        mi nitcu le du'u lo tanxe cu co'e       (opaque)
        mi nitcu tu'a lo tanxe                  (opaque)
        mi nitcu lo tanxe                       (transparent)


Is that a fair rendition?


Jorge