From lojbab Mon Dec  5 06:29:22 1994
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 06:29:14 -0500
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab>
Message-Id: <199412051129.AA05209@access4.digex.net>
Subject: Re: cmavo hit list - lojbab responds
Cc: lojbab@access.digex.net, lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Status: RO

>la goran cusku di'e
>
>> A question about sumti valsi and velski... if you have an expression
>> like {le la goran. za'o melbi cidju}, what is its first letter?
>> Is this gy., zy., my. or cy.? I'd say the last one, cy., but I'm
>> not sure.
>
>I'd also use cy in that case.

So would I, but only after an intermediate "le cidju" (cidja???) at the
first back reference.  I would say that anytime you have a complex sumti,
it is best to use a short descriptive back-reference first before using a
fully-abbreviated anaphora like a lerfu.  The only excpetion is when you
explicitly assign the anaphora with "goi".

>> Second, if you have {le tavla be la goran.}, what is {ri}? Is it
>> {le tavla be la goran.} or just {la goran.}? I believe the rule is
>> the last completed sumti. They both finish off at the same time.
>> Or does the former finish later than latter? It is {le tavla be
>> la goran. ku be'o ku}... Just some food for thought...

>I'd say {ri} is {la goran}. I don't know how the rule is worded, but
>I always understood it was the last complete sumti, so, of all those
>that have been completed, the one that started last.

ri is la goran
rixire (or likely "ra"), is the full sumti

The only place where you have to be careful with this rule is when you
are back-referencing from within the sumti itself.  "le tavla be la goran
bei ri" refers to some sumti previous toi the whole phrase since the
reference is within a not-completed sumti.

lojbab