From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Fri Dec 22 14:58:23 1995 Reply-To: Scott Brickner Date: Fri Dec 22 14:58:23 1995 Sender: Lojban list From: Scott Brickner Subject: Re: response to Steven Belknap on language baselines and stability (long) X-To: Logical Language Group X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: (Your message of Fri, 22 Dec 1995 03:39:29 EST.) <199512220839.DAA16670@access1.digex.net> Status: OR Message-ID: Logical Language Group writes: >Because the grammar of whatever is non-standard is as unrestricted as the >capability of non-standardness, there is no cmavo that could unfailingly >cover the territory. za'e is pretty restricted and does not solve any >grammar problems. Sure, but I'd bet one could be devised which would cover *most* of the territory. The rest could be managed with lo'u/le'u (which could take the subscript describing the variant, if needed). I'd also bet that the variants which *can't* be expressed with something like za'e, but in UI, would never be accepted into the language, anyway.