| In a message dated 8/29/2001 3:48:49 PM Central Daylight Time,
a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com writes: Before this debate began, rule 1 was NOT established or agreed on, and Depends upon when you think this debate began. This point could not have arisen before someone actually said that {du'u} is just {ka} with... Before THAT comment was made, I think point 1 was pretty much agreed on -- once {ce'u} came tyo be understood at all, that is. <This really belongs in a different thread about lo'e, but it does seem to me that for any construct that focuses on x1, the proper way to handle it is using our x1-focusing construction, viz. gadri + sumti-tail.> Is that a threat there will be such a thread, separate from {ce'u}? But, if so, didn't you just object to doing a gadri+ sumti-tail for "the typical"? <What is Nalgol?> Ah, the loss of community memory (and thus the need to repeat our mistakes, I suppose). Nalgol is the language "to improve a minor point in Loglan" by totally redoing a mass of major design features. The original one was, I think, Jim Carter's back in the late 70s. We haven't had occasion to mention this typical constructed language phenomenon in Lojban much since the base-lining (and before it was part of the process), but recently there seems to have been a spate of ever more aggressive cases which now seem to call the word back into use. Or should we shift to Nabjol? I think not; the chance to shoot at the languages of the 60s and 70s is still to good to pass by. |