From - Tue Feb 20 15:05:29 1996
Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id HAA13410 for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Sun, 18 Feb 1996 07:02:15 -0500
Message-Id: <199602181202.HAA13410@locke.ccil.org>
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B4377964 ; Sun, 18 Feb 1996 6:27:56 -0500
Date:         Sun, 18 Feb 1996 11:26:15 +0000
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: cue
X-To:         Lojban List <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length:  542


> > The lambda marker could perfectly well have gone in KohA. But John
> > thought a new selmao was prettier.
> If the lambda marker were in KOhA, it would be hard to say "ce'u broda"
> (i.e. "ce'u da poi broda"), which is the domain-restricted lambda.  I'm
> not sure that "xe'u poi broda" (where "xe'u" is a KOhA lambda) does the
> right thing.

Ah, I had thought you just liked the extra bit of brevity in the {ceu
broda} form. I didn't realize {xeu poi} could be tricky. I still don't
see why it is, though.

coo, mie and