From cowan Tue Sep 12 12:58:44 1995
Subject: Re: afterthought conn within NU?
To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu (Lojban List)
From: John Cowan <cbmvax!uunet!marob.masa.com!cowan>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 1995 12:58:44 -0400 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <199509121059.GAA16673@locke.ccil.org> from "ucleaar" at Sep 11, 95 08:28:31 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length:        815
Status: OR
Message-ID: <6e4bSIXjPFG.A.5GB.o30kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

la .and. cusku di'e

> [Y]ou can't do afterthought
> bridi connectives within a NU clause. Is this true? I certainly don't
> know how to do it, but I'd always assumed that that was because I
> don't know how to do most things Lojban is capable of.

It's true.  The afterthought bridi connectives are really afterthought
>sentence< connectives, being grammatical variants of ".i", so they can't
be used within embedded bridi.

> Nik says to
> Ivan that the solution is to insert a {kei} plus sumti conn
> (i.e., I presume, {le nu .... kei e le nu...}) but that quite
> obviously distorts the semantics (so much so that I conclude I
> misunderstood the discussion due to poor audio quality).

So it does, so it does.  The real solution is to Plan Ahed.

-- 
John Cowan					cowan@ccil.org
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.