From lojbab  Sat Mar  6 22:46:39 2010
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 05:31:45 -0500
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab>
Subject: Re: mo'e
Status: RO
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Mar 22 05:31:50 1995
X-From-Space-Address: lojbab
Message-ID: <yyPQw0o61pD.A.qYG.Pv0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

I'll have to defer most of responsse to off-line but:
Jorge:>> >{la'e mo'e da} is not grammatical.
>> It should be grammatical!.  Look at the last rule in operand_385.  haven't
>> checked the parser, though.
>
>You are right, it is grammatical. I felt that it had to be ungrammatical
>because it is not a sumti. I have no idea what kind of operand is
>{la'e <operand>}. It still feels ungrammatical to me, even if it is
>accepted by the parser.

You mean that you have never used a 'pointer variable' in programming?
I always though "la'e" was much clearer in a Mex context than in a semantic
one.  It means take the value of the operand, and use that value to select
or point to a second-order operand value.

lojbab