From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:59:11 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 10288 invoked from network); 13 Nov 1996 02:09:00 -0000 Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 13 Nov 1996 02:09:00 -0000 Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <12.792B5F14@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 3:08:57 +0100 Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 21:07:13 -0500 Reply-To: "Trevor C. Hill" Sender: Lojban list From: "Trevor C. Hill" Subject: place switching cmavo... X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1210 Lines: 25 Message-ID: I have an idea that i'd like to discuss regarding the 'se te ve xe' cmavo... It seems to me that because the places are, for the most part, ordered by frequency of use, these words should simply take a certain place (x2 for se) and put it at the front, leaving the other places in their original order... The main reason I think I like this approach better is because when i'm speaking lojban to friends, I always need to use a 'fa fe etc.' word after the brivla to get back to the x1 place... and there is no doubt in my mind that there are extremely few people who can do more than one 'switching' transformation on the fly and still know where the places are going to be afterwards... This approach would still allow all of the transformations that can be done with the present approach, but would imho have the advantage of persistent simplicity and of keeping the most often used cmavo near the beginning of the place structure.... I'm interested in hearing people's thoughts on this... I've been thinking about this quite a lot and it seems to me that this approach is really better for practical use..... feel free to blast me if i'm wrong though :) thanx... Trevor C. Hill th2x+@andrew.cmu.edu