Return-Path: Received: from fiport.funet.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rc8Oc-00001oC; Wed, 8 Feb 95 11:09 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (MAILER@SEARN) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-13 #2494) id <01HMSUV1IRYO00324K@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Wed, 08 Feb 1995 09:04:52 +0200 (EET) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3364; Wed, 8 Feb 1995 10:05:40 +0100 Date: Tue, 07 Feb 1995 18:09:23 +0000 From: ucleaar Subject: Re: zi'o (was: jorne) In-reply-to: (Your message of Mon, 06 Feb 95 13:55:32 MST.) Sender: Lojban list To: Veijo Vilva Reply-to: ucleaar Message-id: <01HMSUV28D3A00324K@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Content-Length: 607 Lines: 13 > We already have great facilities for *adding* places, by using BAI cmavo or > by making lujvo (especially standard ones like XXX-gau). I'd rather start > with minimal bridi and build them than delete places anyway. Since the > current gismu have for the most part been defined fairly minimally, I rarely > come across the need for "zi'o". I think the use of "zi'o" signals that a > gismu has been defined with too many places to begin with. True. But on the whole we're stuck with the place structures we have. LLG has good reasons for resisting change, since lots of people don't like it. --- And