On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 08:02:55PM -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 7/4/2002 5:08:35 PM Central Daylight Time,
> lojban-out@lojban.org writes:
>
>
> > IIRC, ri, ra and ru skip sumti of: ri ra ru ko'[aeiou] mi do ti ta tu ...
> > Additionally, "ra" != "rixire". ra just refers to a further-than-last
> > sumti, not the next to last.
>
> This sounds right, once said, so I withdraw my hope that {ri/a/u} is
> unambiguous, but hope this avoids the kind of doubling up that Nora
> suggested.
>
for the record (I think this may be what you meant, but it was phrased
slightly odd):
- ri is unambiguous. ri xi <something> is unambiguous.
- ra and ru are ambiguous.
- ru must always refer to something earlier than a ra in the same
utterance. (spoon example in chap7).
--
Jordan DeLong
fracture@allusion.net
Attachment:
pgp00011.pgp
Description: PGP signature