Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0t7Gi7-0000ZOC; Mon, 23 Oct 95 08:50 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A74E3117 ; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 7:50:15 +0100 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 06:47:01 +0000 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: rel clause paper X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 681 Lines: 19 1. Re. 6.10: why are relatives attached to {re karce} 'taken to be of the outside-the-"ku" variety'? To get inside-ku, you must use {re lo karce poi kuo ku}, right? 2. 8.3 shd read "le *vu* kumfa"? 3. Re 8.4: "but only that Frank is a man" - shd be "George"? 4. Is there any way for a relative to be part of a name? I could address you by {doi xirma}, but could I address you by {doi xirma poi ci da tuple kea}, without asserting that you have 3 legs, just as I wouldn't be asserting that you are a horse? 5. Re 10.2. "the implication of [{keaxire}] is that sumti attached to the second relative". Is there some way of making that explicit rather than merely implied? --- And