Re: [lojban] Re: .iseca'obo

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

--- Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
> On Sat, May 15, 2004 at 03:00:46PM -0700, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:
> > 
> > --- Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
> > > Hint: it doesn't mean anything; ca'o has no places, and thus can't
> > > take SE.
> > 
> > Any sumti tcita must relate two things, the sumti it tags and the
> > event it modifies, so SE makes as much sense on any tag as it does on
> > BAI. 
> 
> Be that as it may, and I have no idea if I agree or not, that's
> definately not how things are currently defined.

I only wanted to point out that your "thus" was unjustified.
I know {se co'a} is currently undefined, but it has an obvious
definition that follows from how SE acts on other tags.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! - Internet access at a great low price.
http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/