From lojbab Sat Mar 6 22:47:12 2010 From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: Imaginary Journeys Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 14:45:09 -0500 (EST) Cc: lojbab@access.digex.net (Logical Language Group) In-Reply-To: <199503080600.AA03272@nfs2.digex.net> from "Glyn Gowing" at Mar 7, 95 08:49:33 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24beta] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 837 Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Wed Mar 8 14:45:22 1995 X-From-Space-Address: lojbab Message-ID: la glyn. cusku di'e > I believe i _may_ have found an error or two in the Imaginary Journeys paper: > > p 15: > example 21.10 reads: la .artr. pu je'i ba nolraitru > > je'i is defined in my cmavo list as the /tanru/ afterthought question > connector. Maybe i'm missing something here, but wouldn't ji make > more sense here? No. The JA selma'o are used to connect tenses and a few other things as well as tanru. See the connectives paper at the FTP site. Note that "ji" belongs to selma'o A, for historical reasons. > Also, in the proposed replies: > > je is listed to indicate 'both' (makes sense) > > The next two, however, seem reversed: in the paper they read: > naje 'the former' and jenai 'the latter' Fixed. -- John Cowan sharing account for now e'osai ko sarji la lojban.