The thing about selsku is that some text cannot be represented indirectly, e.g. zo quotes of non-selbri, such as {zo ui}. This raises a question. We frequently say we pilno words. Is this usage correct? If we let pilno3 be a function involving pilno2, then the type of pilno2 comes from that selbri and we're safe. Otherwise, there is type opaqueness in pipno2. {.i mi pilno zo coi .i mi pilno lo plise .imi citka lo selpli} On Apr 17, 2013, at 20:45, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. |