[lojban] Re: use of ko'a

[Invent Yourself <xod@thestonecutters.net>]

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Jordan DeLong wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 04:09:03PM +0200, Adam Raizen wrote:
> > de'i li 2003-07-19 ti'u li 16:43:00 la'o zoi. Craig .zoi cusku di'e
> >
> > >>Unbound malglico.  Either use my. or le go'i or ra or bind the ko'a.
> > >>my. and ra even cost less syllables, so I don't see what argument
> > >>there is for the unbound ko'a.
> > >
> > >The argument is, pe'i, that it is grammatical so it ought to be meaningful.
> > >To those of you who argue for unbound ko'a, if that is your reason, I have a
> > >question for you. i pei xu cu'e xo ma mo? If not, then what is your reason?
> >
> > That's not the argument. The argument is that it is grammatical, it has
> > an obvious meaning, and it is useful. Not every sumti place has to be
>
> But I reject that it is useful, since you can get the same use with
> less syllables using existing anaphora.


Back this up by rearranging my example text with fewer syllables.



-- 
The Pentagon group believed it had a visionary strategy that would
transform Iraq into an ally of Israel, remove a potential threat to the
Persian Gulf oil trade and encircle Iran with U.S. friends and allies...