Re: [lojban] Re: cfari

[Jorge "Llambías" <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar>]

--- John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> wrote:
> Robin Lee Powell scripsit:
> 
> > Those of you without time/ability to read the Lojban might might the
> > topic interesting: xorxes was pointing out four places where I used
> > a COI cmavo as though it was UI (i.e., without following it with a
> > name).  xorxes expressed his desire for COI cmavo to actually
> > grammatically be like UI cmavo (which I'm inclined to agree with).
> 
> Well, UI binds to the previous word.  Is that what you were doing?

Doesn't the COI construct also bind to the previous word? If so, that 
wouldn't make a difference. In these examples Robin used them at the 
beginning of the sentence, binding to {i} which means that they bind 
to the whole bridi.

> It's certainly grammatical to have COI by itself now, although you
> need an explicit "do'u" if the next thing is a name or sumti.

Or a selbri. It would be very rare to follow a bare COI with a name,
but sumti and selbri are very common. In practice, about the only 
place where bare COIs can be used safely is followed by {i}. 

mu'o mi'e xorxes


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree