| In a message dated 5/30/2001 9:44:33 AM Central Daylight Time,
jcowan@reutershealth.com writes: Essentially that there was no way of representing what Yes, this is what I thought I recalled. Except that {steci be} does not do justice to the first use JCB gave to it (though it surely passed through this in the traditional JCB path from light to miasma): The first two uses were {ti me la Kraislr karce} (translating to Lojban, I hope) and {la loglan se kevna lo me zo me} "There is a me-shaped hole in Loglan" (JCB inevitably thought this the cleverest use of "me," and it does have a charm). The point is that {me} was originally about words and their application to things or, rather, the things they were applied to, not about the referents of the expressions that followed the {me}. The phenomenon intended is common enough to deserve a cheap means (and {me} now seems virtually useless, given {du} and other ordinary features). |