Return-Path: <@SEGATE.SUNET.SE:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0saocF-0000ZFC; Tue, 25 Jul 95 21:22 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v0.1a) with SMTP id 777F254E ; Tue, 25 Jul 1995 20:19:54 +0200 Date: Tue, 25 Jul 1995 18:50:08 +0100 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: noa regressing X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1137 Lines: 24 Lojbab: > And: > >The current logic of {nei} and {noa} seems rather odd to me - it seems > >to give an infinite regression of bridis that contain copies of > >themselves. I've probably misunderstood {nei} and {noa}, but if I > >haven't maybe they could be reassigned. [I guess they are intended to > >be used with gadri, e.g. {lo te noa}, but I don't see how that avoids > >infinite regression.] > la djef. jinvi ledu'u > la djan. cu klama le zarci le zdani fu le karce po le nei > Jeff opines that John goes to the store from the house in his (John's) > car. la djef. jinvi leduu la djan. cu klama le zarci fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci bei fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci bei fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci bei fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci bei fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci bei fu le karce po le nei be la djan bei le zarci fu le karce po le nei..... --- And