From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU  Sat Mar  6 22:59:11 2010
Return-Path: <LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI
Received: (qmail 10690 invoked from network); 19 Nov 1996 17:25:52 -0000
Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (192.36.125.6)
  by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 19 Nov 1996 17:25:52 -0000
Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <9.8F10E5C9@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 18:25:52 +0100
Date:         Tue, 19 Nov 1996 17:32:58 +0100
Reply-To:     "R.M. Uittenbogaard" <reneuit@SCI.KUN.NL>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         "R.M. Uittenbogaard" <reneuit@SCI.KUN.NL>
Subject:      Re: place switching cmavo...
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 601
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <iFPQWrNnCvN.A.QFC._60kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

Lojbab wrote:

> > fo le dargu cu klama fa mi do lemi zdani fu le karce

> The "fu" is not necessary there, since the "fo" has
> already been taken care of.

I always thought the places were numbered subsequently, and

fo le dargu cu klama fa mi do lemi zdani le karce

meant that "le karce" occupies the x4 place as well, which makes
it equal in meaning to:

mi klama do lemi zdani le dargu .e le karce   ,  or
mi klama do lemi zdani le dargu fo le karce

So instead, filled places are skipped for subsequent sumti?

fo le dargu fe do klama fa mi lemi zdani le karce vau ki'a zo'o


co'o mi'e reneis