Re: [lojban] Re: le duX

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

John:
> And Rosta scripsit:
>
> > I had assumed that co'e ranges across all possible relations, not across
> > all possible grammatical selbri. But I may be wrong; it may be that co'e
> > is indeed the counterpart of zo'e, in which case the question was
wrongly
> > reposed.
>
> co'e was indeed intended as a counterpart of zo'e, but I don't understand
> your distinction between "all possible relations" and "all possible
> grammatical selbri", unless it is a matter of referent and reference.

zo'e clearly ranges over words (specifically, grammatical sumti phrases),
not
referents/'things', since zo'e's range includes "su'oda" & arguably
"zi'o" --
which aren't referential.

I'm happy to accept that co'e, like zo'e, ranges over words rather than
relations (i.e. over expressions rather than meanings).

In that case, though, I should repose my question again, to something more
like the following.

bu'a  :  lo   :    da
go'a  :  --   :    ra
broda :  --   :    ke'a
co'e  : tu'o1 :    zo'e
????1 : tu'o2 :    zi'o
????2 :  le   :    ????3

????1 would substitute for "du" in "le du". ????3 would serve the function
that ledu-users use ledu for. ????2 would be what I had formerly thought
co'e to be.

--And.