From LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Sat Mar  6 22:45:23 2010
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Date: Wed Dec 20 18:13:51 1995
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      TECH: PROPOSAL: KUhAhU & KIhAhI
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Status: OR
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Dec 20 18:13:51 1995
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU
Message-ID: <15_ZXhUzDCN.A.q_E.Du0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

I propose two cmavo, {kuau} (in selmao KUhAhU) and its corresponding
terminator {kiai} (in selmao KIhAhI). They contain a bridi and yield
a sumti.

At present one must use LE + duu ... kei. There is no good reason
to involve a selbri (duu). The resulting mismatch between syntax
and semantics is very offensive.

Jorge suggested (in effect) that {kuau} should be in LU. I have
not proposed that, because LU ... LIhU contain not just bridi.

I realize that Lojban Central will be unswayed by the case for these
new cmavo, but when I have to use {duu} I experience a mental nausea
so acute that it is almost visceral too. So for my own health I must
start using {suau}.

coo, mie And