Re: [lojban] lo with discourse-scope?

[Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>]

On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 04:06:27PM -0500, Rob Speer wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 03:59:53PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Rob Speer wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 09:26:08AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > > > Uhhh, doesn't da keep its binding until changed?
> > >
> > > According to recent discussion (and this dismays me greatly) {da} loses
> > > its binding at the next bare {.i}!
> > 
> > 
> > If that were the case there would hardly be a need for da'o.
> 
> Precisely. Hence I was wondering why there wasn't more of an outcry
> when (against all probability) PC and And both agreed about that.

I wasn't paying attention.

> .i da poi la rab.spir
> .i da sarji zo gumri

What's gumri?

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ 	BTW, I'm male, honest.
le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno
je xlali -- RLP 				http://www.lojban.org/