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 DAA22259 for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Wed, 21 Feb 1996 03:56:59 -0500
Message-Id: <199602210856.DAA22259@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 458565B6 ; Wed, 21 Feb 1996 3:22:19 -0500
Date:         Wed, 21 Feb 1996 08:43:21 +0100
Reply-To: Goran Topic <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Goran Topic <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>
Subject:      Re: PLI: gismu for <lojrfuzi>
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 720
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Feb 21 13:50:44 1996
X-From-Space-Address: -

> > Yes, but we do not differentiate between kamkantu and kamselkantu in
> > gliban.
>
> Do we distinguish them in Lojban? After all, {ka kantu kei} means
> the same as {ka se kantu kei}; or is there some jvajvo convention
> that makes {kamkantu} = {ka kea kantu kei} and {kamselkantu} =
> {ka kea se kantu kei}? I suppose such a convention is a good idea,
> if you like jvajvo.

.i mi sruma da'i la'edi'u .i zo ke'a ka'e sumti lo sucta pezo ke fi roda
.iku'i va'o lenu ra goi ko'a nalselsku kei mi sruma ledu'u ko'a sumti fi
le pamoi be le'i nalselsku

(I would assume so. ke'a can be anywhere in a ka abstraction; but, when
I see ke'aless ka, I suppose that it fills the first unspecified
position)

co'o mi'e. goran.