Re: [lojban] Toward a {ce'u} recordt

[John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>]

Pierre Abbat scripsit:

> I think both 2 and 3. In formal Lojban, {ce'u} fills the first unfilled 
> place, counting {zo'e} as filling a place; in informal Lojban, it fills the 
> first unfilled place that makes sense. I would also apply these rules to ke'a 
> in relative clauses.

Me too.  But neither of these is a *rule* of the language, in the sense
of "if there are no untagged sumti before the selbri, then x1 must be empty".

> Would ce'uxipa and ce'uxire apply to two sumti such that the property is a 
> relationship between them, or would they apply to different levels of nested 
> ka?

I think the latter works for ke'a, but not for ce'u, except perhaps for a
coreference to an upper-level ka, and in that case, which ce'u (if there is
more than one) is meant?

-- 
John Cowan           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan@ccil.org
Please leave your values        |       Check your assumptions.  In fact,
   at the front desk.           |          check your assumptions at the door.
     --sign in Paris hotel      |            --Miles Vorkosigan