On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:For some (admittedly rare) texts you don't have the option of adding
>
> It is my understanding that {.i} is "optional" at the beginning of a new
> text. "Optional" in that context, means the same thing to me as elidable.
".i" nor "ni'o" at the beginning. For example ".aionys." is a valid
text, ".i .aionys." is not. "nai" is a valid text, ".i nai." is not.
But I won't press this point because I would want both of those to be
valid.
In any case, the optionality of initial ".i" is a different thing from
the elidable terminators. The elidable terminators in a sense can be
said to be there even when not explicit, the optional ".i/ni'o" is not
really there in the same sense.
>> So you are willing to give up the useful property of texts of having a
>> speaker and an audience, for the rare occasions when someone wants to
>> complete someone else's sentences?
>
> I don't agree that those properties are "given up".Well, a text formed from a concatenated string of conversational texts
is no longer a se cusku with a well defined cusku and a well defined
te cusku.
mu'o mi'e xorxes