I don't know if I follow you here... vomo'o is meant to be a sumti,
that's why I said le vomo'o. I never meant it to be a selbri.
Sumti always involve a selbri. Think of {lo dunda}, where
{dunda} is the selbri, {le te preti}, where {te preti} is the
selbri, {la ranjit.} where {ranjit.} is the selbri etc.
vomoi is
'fourth' as an ordinal if I remember correctly. How can vomoi stand alone?
It can form a sumti as {lo vomoi}, and so refer to a fourth
section of anything.
Jorge said {vomo'o} was an indicator because... because
it really was. :) It cannot be used as a sumti.
I'd kinda hoped {li xo} was correct because I took it directly from
the LFB... :)
:D
Don't ever believe me when I happen to contradict
some trustworthy document on Lojban grammar!
(Really, do not. :))
mi'e darves.