Re: [lojban] selma'o considered harmful

[John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>]

Pierre Abbat wrote:

> What about "du"? According to the cmavo list, it's in selma'o GOhA, but the 
> only difference between GOhA and BRIVLA is that GOhA can be followed by ra'o, 
> and "du ra'o" doesn't make sense. So could "du" be said to be in selma'o 
> BRIVLA?


Originally "du" was in its own selma'o, DU, and was permitted only

as a selbri_B_132 (IIRC). But I somewhat hastily over-generalized it
into selma'o GOhA, thus permitting some highly dubious constructs like
tanru with du.

--
There is / one art || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein