From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU  Sat Mar  6 22:58:46 2010
Return-Path: <LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI
Received: (qmail 5300 invoked from network); 18 Dec 1996 14:59:51 -0000
Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6)
  by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 18 Dec 1996 14:59:51 -0000
Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <11.F6176F79@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Wed, 18 Dec 1996 15:59:49 +0100
Date:         Wed, 18 Dec 1996 14:54:47 GMT+0
Reply-To:     And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Organization: University of Central Lancashire
Subject:      Re: lojban imperfections?
X-To:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 379
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <HvZrCzD96aL.A.V8B.m60kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

> As for why most of the Lojban utterances generated to date are
> predicate-medial rather than predicate-final, well, that may have
> something to do with the [native English speaker]hood of most of
> the present population of Lojbanistan; but no one has to follow suit.

As I recall, the Bradford dialect of Lojban of some years ago
tended to be predicate-final.

coo, mie And