Re: [jboske] Re: gadri paradigm: 2 excellent proposals

[Nick Nicholas <opoudjis@optushome.com.au>]

On Sun, Dec 22, 2002 at 02:27:42PM +1100, Nick Nicholas wrote:
[...]
> > * Rejecting the DeLong/LeChevalier line of {lo prenu remei cu bevri},
> > because if {remei} is a mass we're back to square one (it could still
> > be one person doing the carrying), and if {remei} is a collective...
> > well, that might work, but it needs a lot of thinking
>
> Try jo'u.

Maybe, but not a general answer. {.e} is to {lo} as {joi} is to {loi} 
as {jo'u} is to... what? {lo romei be lo'i}?

> [ I didn't read the whole message. I've been spending (wasting)
> too much time with jboske crap, which is currently quite a bit too
> tinkeringish for my taste. So no other response here. ]

Respected. The accusation of tinkeringness is valid if the main 
disputants are willing to sacrifice continuity (And and Jorge, consider 
yourselves tarred :-) ). But that the current system *is* a mess, that 
I believe is still clear. So we'll get back to you once the ontology 
settles.

--
DR NICK NICHOLAS. FRENCH/ITALIAN, UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA.
nickn@unimelb.edu.au Tour orghnie tou gerou na ninere,
http://www.opoudjis.net tou p!ounte si na mh si ninere:
"Hearken to an old man's advice --- not to his farts." Tsakonian 
proverb.