Re: [lojban] A revised ce'u proposal involving si'o (fwd)

[pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/12/2001 11:19:54 PM Central Daylight Time,
rob@twcny.rr.com writes:

Wait a minute. I thought the whole point of inventing {ce'u} instead of using
{ke'a} was that {ce'u} is never coreferential to other instances of {ce'u}.

Not the *whole* reason -- the boundness is important, too -- but a
significant fact.  (Actually, the lack of coreference is a result of the
boundness.)