Re: [lojban] Named multiples

[Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com>]

ok.  That makes sense.  So effectively {mi djan} would be {mi me la djan}.

And my mistake, I forgot that si,sa,su each had their own selma'o.  So you have no qualms about si and su then?  If any of the three were to go away I suppose {sa] would be the least annoying to me.

2010/5/18 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wait, the proposal then is to get rid of all of SA, not just sa itself?

The only cmavo in selma'o SA is sa itself.

> What would be the proposed default meaning of
> something like {ko'a cu djan ko'e ko'i}?

Stage-three and stage-four fu'ivla don't have default meanings, so
there is no reason for stage-two fu'ivla to have a default meaning.

I would say the most obvious meaning for an otherwise meaningless
predicate word is "x1 is named <word>". I wouldn't expect it to be a
three argument predicate.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--

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.

-- 
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.