RE: [jboske] more on shortening romu'ei stuff

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

Is there any difference between having these cmavo in TAhE
as opposed to CAhA?

> la djorden. cusku di'e
> 
> >Seems that a lot of use of mu'ei is either going to be ro or su'o 
> >(probably mostly the former). What about making a pair of cmavo
> >in selma'o TAhE (roi doesn't allow having a default for the number)
> >which do that? If the one for ro could be single syllable it would
> >be all the better: perhaps 'xau'. Not sure if the one for su'o is
> >as useful, and as such if it's even worth creating I'd definitely
> >not recommend a xVV for it 
> 
> The su'o version is, I think, exactly ka'e, and I've already proposed
> an experimental cmavo for the ro version: bi'ai. I agree that bi'ai
> might be a bit long, though. Maybe we should wait and see for sure 
> 
> >(note that doing as such would make for counterfactual conditionals
> >taking no more syllables than indicative ones: mi xaugi xagji gi
> >citka vs. mi ganai xagji gi citka) 
> 
> I would say: mi bi'ai gi xagji gi citka 
> 
> mu'o mi'e .adam