Re: du'u in lieu of ka (was: Re: [lojban] Toward a {ce'u} record

[And Rosta <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>]

Xod:
#On Tue, 21 Aug 2001, And Rosta wrote:
#> I agree, but there is a remedy within the baseline, so long as zo'e
#> cannot be read as a ce'u (and if it can, then existing usage of
#> du'u is unspeakably ambiguous): And The Cowan has averred
#> that construing zo'e as ce'u is as heinous as construing it as
#> noda.
#>
#> Since {du'u} doesn't guarantee the presence of a covert or overt
#> ce'u, using {du'u ... ce'u} instead of {ka ... (ce'u)} forces all ce'u
#> to be overt. Thus those of us who are rightly worried about the
#> horrible vagueness/ambiguity of allowing covert ce'u within
#> ka bridi can simply not use ka and use du'u instead.
#
#All around, this is the simplest and most elegant solution: ditch ka, use
#du'u and some number of ce'u. But what about the kam- rafsi? It's too
#useful to abandon.

So "kambroda" means "broda-hood"? Why abandon something that is
useful and not flawed? Use "kam-" but not "ka".

BTW, I noticed after writing my message above that there seems
to be a conflict between the following ruloids:

Ruloid 1.
Zo'e fills any empty place. 
[I *think* this is somewhere in Woldy.]

Ruloid 2.
Zo'e cannot be construed as ce'u. 
[Thus spake The Cowan, recently.]

Ruloid 3.
Ce'u can be elided.

--And.




-----
"I have never been active in politics or in any act against occupation,
but the way the soldiers killed Mizyed has filled me with hatred and
anger. Now I'm ready to carry out a suicide attack inside Israel,"
one of the witnesses said.





To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/