From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu Wed Mar 22 18:07:20 1995 From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Date: Wed Mar 22 18:07:20 1995 Subject: Re: mo'e Status: RO Message-ID: > >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 }. 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? Not knowingly. But operands are not like programming variables, are they? > I always though "la'e" was much clearer in a Mex context than in a semantic > one. I understand {la'e} in front of a sumti that refers to a name/citation. It is essentially the inverse of quoting, e.g. {la'e zo mi} is more or less equivalent to "the speaker". > It means take the value of the operand, and use that value to select > or point to a second-order operand value. I guess I'll have to wait and see it in use. Anyway, what does {mo'e da}, or {la'e mo'e da} mean, then? Do we use the rule for {mo'e li ci} or the one for {mo'e lo plise}? Is it some quantifier or the dimensioned number "at least one something"? Jorge