Re: [lojban-beginners] Why is CAhA a tense/modal?

[Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com>]

what could be more canonical for the definition of a word than the lojbanic definition in jbovlaste?

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:34 AM, Thomas Jack <thomasjack@gmail.com> wrote:

> According to how this CAhA is actually defined, {ro datka ka'e
> flulimna} means {lo nu ro datka cu flulimna cu cumki}, which I'm not
> sure would be true if there already is an actuality where some ducks
> can't swim.

Ah, do you take the Lojban<->Lojban definition ({fi'o se cumki}) at
jbovlaste to be canonical?

Unfortunately I don't think this is a safe strategy in general,
whether or not xorxes is right about {ka'e}.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.