Return-Path: Received: from fiport.funet.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rb025-00001EC; Sun, 5 Feb 95 08:01 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (MAILER@SEARN) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-13 #2494) id <01HMOHEXLT40000VN7@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Sun, 05 Feb 1995 05:56:52 +0200 (EET) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9821; Sun, 5 Feb 1995 06:57:45 +0100 Date: Sun, 05 Feb 1995 00:59:53 -0500 From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: jorne Sender: Lojban list To: Veijo Vilva Reply-to: Logical Language Group Message-id: <01HMOHEYEDLU000VN7@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-To: ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Content-Length: 714 Lines: 17 >Lojbab: >> I still abhor zi'o and would thus never suggest it %~) > >Is the abhorrence to the notion of creating a new selbri by removing >a sumti place of another selbri, or is it to the syntactic device of >filling the sumti place by {ziho}, which looks like a sumti? The latter. I still prefer tanru/lujvvo approaches to modifying place structures to add or remove places. I also tend to think rather more highly of the existing place structures. Thus I have trouble conceiving of a fastening without an agent. When people start coming up with specific usage problems, I can then try to resolve them, but only a real pattern of such problems will convince me that "zi'o lasna" iss even meaningful. lojbab