[lojban] Re: {le} in xorlo (was: Re: Response to Robin's "Essay on the future of Lojban"

[Daniel Brockman <dbrockman@gmail.com>]

On Apr 23, 1:08 am, Jorge Llambías <jjllamb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 7:54 PM, Daniel Brockman <dbrock...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 12, 8:20 pm, And Rosta <and.ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> I'm also wondering whether there exists an experimental
> >> specific KOhA, a nonanaphoric "it/them". (I think I used to
> >> use "le du" in lieu of such.)
>
> > I've been using {le co'e} for this for quite a while, and I too
> > wish I had a KOhA for it.  It feels like a language hole.
>
> That reminds me, someone once proposed making "LE KU" grammatical.

Oh, right!  I forgot about that.  I remember now that we talked about
it some months ago.

> That's perfectly doable grammar-wise, and it immediately gives not
> only "le ku" but also "lo ku" (= zo'e), "loi ku", "lei ku", "lo'e ku"
> (=zu'i?), "le'e ku", "lo'i ku", "le'i ku" in case anyone ever needs
> them.

I actually wanted to say that I think a {la}-like version of {zo'e}
would be useful too (sort of a lightweight {ko'a}), but it felt like
too much of a luxury to even bring up, what with all the other
important issues being discussed.

With the LE KU grammar, however, bringing it up feels more okay.  So:
can we get LA KU as well?


--
Daniel Brockman
daniel@brockman.se

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.