[lojban] jegi

[tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com>]

On Apr 18, 2:20 am, Jorge Llambías <jjllamb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 8:57 PM, John E Clifford <kali9pu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 21 (iirc) versions of 'e' all amounting to logical "and". Arose because the use of one such  ('ga... gi') was incorrect and another ('gu'a ... gu'i') was required to do the same work.  The others are a nice point as well, of course, though with a different motivation.
> 
> Yes, I realized after I had already posted that you must have meant ge/gu'e.
> 
> The situation is not as bad as 21 though, there's just the two
> forethought ge/gu'e and three afterthought .e/je/gi'e, so five in all.
> 
> "gu'e" should just be deprecated, and for all intents and purposes de
> facto it is, since practically nobody ever uses it.
> 
> "je" should be extended to cover the function of ".e", thus making
> ".e" redundant. JOI already does both functions, so there's no
> syntactic impediment there.
> 
> "gi'e" can be replaced with "gije".
> 
> That would leave just "ge" for forethought, and "je" for afterthought.

Couldn't we also replace "ge" with "jegi"?

-- 
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.