Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0tKZuN-0000ZUC; Wed, 29 Nov 95 01:57 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2DCB045D ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 0:57:54 +0100 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 18:56:13 -0500 Reply-To: Jorge Llambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: self-descriptions? X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, jorge@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 879 Lines: 25 And: > > I agree. I would also prefer that V-initial not be singled out like > > that. > Do we know why it is? A relic of some ancient Brownian predilection? Something to do with the Loglan imperative, I think. > xe xi pa nu = nu xi pa = nu > se nu = nu xi re (= su'uxipa = fa'a'a) > te nu = nu xi ci (= su'uxire = fe'e'e) > ve nu = nu xi vo (= su'uxici = fi'i'i) > xe nu = nu xi mu (= su'uxivo = fo'o'o) > xe xi xa nu = nu xi xa (= su'uximu = fu'u'u) > > i.e. the place structure of nu broda is the same as of nunbroda. > > This would placate me, and since it requires no change to the > current syntax, and but little undoing of existing semantics, > I think I might adopt it. That works for me. {nu} doesn't have defined x2, x3, etc, so it seems perfectly fine to assume that that is what you get upon SE conversion. Jorge