Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0t5Dj4-0000ZOC; Tue, 17 Oct 95 17:14 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 23504325 ; Tue, 17 Oct 1995 16:14:45 +0100 Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 09:46:13 -0400 Reply-To: John Cowan Sender: Lojban list From: John Cowan Subject: Re: la mark,l fraba'u fi la xorxes X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199510112349.TAA05078@locke.ccil.org> from "ucleaar" at Oct 12, 95 00:21:21 am Content-Length: 661 Lines: 15 la .and. cusku di'e > NO!!? Are you telling me that use of FA affects the x-numbering > of subsequent suivla? So without that added {fa} it's as if there > were a {fo} there? No! Mercy! It does, indeed. The rule is that an un-FA-marked place falls into the first empty place following the last FA-marked place, except that a sumti following the selbri cannot fall into the x1 place (it must be put there by "fa"). Only explicit FAs can cause a place to be occupied twice. Places marked with BAIs or tenses or "fi'a" are not counted by this rule. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.