Date:         Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:37:26 -0400
Reply-To:     Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: le jbogensku
To:           Multiple recipients of list LOJBAN <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Message-ID: <908599260.2019962.0@listserv.cuny.edu>
Content-Length: 1705
Lines: 43


>>coi
>>mi pu tcidu le nu le jbogensku be la djan. koan. to mi na birti le nu
>>cmevalsi cu drani to'i cu gasnu le nu le jboge'a ca'o cu stodi fi'o temci
>le
>>mu nanca .i kau le za'e fi'ogo'i cu mo clani
>>co'o mi'e djan maynat.
>
>coi djan
>
>i li'a le jbogencku cu sidju le nu stodi i la lojbangirz pu nupre
>le du'u le gerna na ba se stika ly ze'a le nanca be li mu i ku'i pe'i
>la'e di'u na vajrai i ma'a ba snada le nu le bangu cu stodi kei
>va'o le nu ma'a by pilno i va'o le nu na pilno kei le bangu ba stodi
>le ka morsi
>
>--More--
>co'o mi'e xorxes

Like he said %^)  Far more elegantly, and certainly more Lojbanically
than I would have.

There is no intent to even THINK about changing the grammar  for at least
5 years.  We actually intend it to be 5 years from when all the baseline
books are done, BTW.  But this is a minimum, and so far there is little
hint that we need any changes.

(We have recently recalled an old infelicity- that the grammar as defined
allows use of all members of SE in logical connectives.  So you can
get nonsense like vejo.  But this is really no worse than taking the
4th place of any 2-place predicate.  And this is the ONLY thing that
has come up since Cowan declared the book done and the baseline started
almost 2 years ago (and it had been noticed back around 1990 and considered
unimportant then).

lojbab