Re: introduction

[John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>]

Robin Turner wrote:

> According to Jorge, {du} can form a tanru with {xlali} to give that meaning
> (which kind of surprised me, but makes sense).

Yes, tanru with "du" are mostly embarrassments, and at first they
weren't allowed, until we noticed that "du ja zmadu" is the natural
way to say "greater than or equal to".  In Old Loglan, there were
separate cmavo for "greater than" and "less than" in math contexts
so as to avoid du-tanru.

  However, it should of course
> be "Jim [not it] should be equally bad."
> 
> > and even la djim. xlali" shd be- ""he
> > is a bad one"" & "la djim. cu xlali"
> >
> 
> I don't see where the "one" comes in here.

I think la maykl. (should be maikl., unless MAH-uckle is the intended
pronunciation) is thinking that names can participate in tanru;
they can't.

-- 
John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan@ccil.org
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)