Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by nfs2.digex.net with SMTP id AA11363 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 22 Dec 1994 15:35:56 -0500 Message-Id: <199412222035.AA11363@nfs2.digex.net> Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5839; Thu, 22 Dec 94 15:30:55 EST Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1028; Thu, 22 Dec 1994 14:55:39 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 19:59:09 +0000 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Scope-leaping: xa'a, xa'anai (-> xo'u -> bo'u) X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Bob LeChevalier Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Thu Dec 22 15:36:01 1994 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu This is a reminder to say that the proposal, originating with pc, of xa'a [named by Jorge, & NOT xa'a-as-talked-about-by-Djer] as an UI indicating scope leaping, and xa'anai [originating with me, & named by Jorge] indicating no scope leaping, still stands (as the chief, and possibly only, change to the grammar to deal with opacity). Since the effect of {xa'a}/{xa'anai} concerns ordering in the prenex of the duhu expressed by the seduhu, and since in a seduhu the prenex is marked by {zohu}, I suggest {bo'u} and {bo'unai} as the actual cmavo. These are currently unassigned (according to my list). I also suggest that in the meantime we give the cmavo new experimental names {xo'u} and {xo'unai}, in the hope that noone else starts using them to mean something else, as has happened with {xa'a} [no complaint intended - who can keep track of all experimental cmavo?]. --- And