Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 12:34:50 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199710231734.MAA06248@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: And Rosta Sender: Lojban list From: And Rosta Organization: University of Central Lancashire Subject: Re: ni X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 920 Lines: 20 Lojbab to someone: > >I realize that we want to treat the refgram as "correct by definition", > >but where the definition is unclear or contradictory, we should clarify > >with the most rational, useful interpretation; and in this case, the > >one that causes least disruption to the refgram. > > However, the gismu list is also baselined and is "correct by definition". > In this case we have clearly stated that the x1 of klani is a ni, the x2 > of lifri is a li'i, etc. Xiron is being recalcitrant, so I can't check the gi`uste, but I don't see how this helps, unless the x1 of klani makes clear whether it can also be filled by a number or not, or by an quantity of measurement units, or by a du`u, or whatever. Same goes for li`i: I don't think there's the same confusion about li`i as there is with jei and ni, but if there were, how would it help to know that x2 of lifri is a li`i? --And.