From LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Sat Mar  6 22:50:44 2010
Reply-To: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Date: Mon Mar 17 09:35:09 1997
X-UIDL: 858609200.117
From: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Organization: University of Central Lancashire
Subject:      Re: RET:  tunlo, x2 & zi'o
To:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Status: U
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 478
X-From-Space-Date: Mon Mar 17 09:35:09 1997
X-From-Space-Address: -
Message-ID: <ICSylR2QUlB.A.4kH.Ez0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

la markl. cusku di'e:
> Suppose someone performs the action of gulping without necessarily
> swallowing any food or drink.  If {tunlo} had an x2 place, would
> we have to say {tunlo zi'o} in order to describe that action?

Yes. Though I bet noone but cranks like me would bother to.

> I'm wondering whether {tunlo} was denied an x2 place as part of an
> effort to minimize the use of {zi'o}.

I don't know, but that certainly would be a sensible reason, pe'i.

co'o mi'e .and.