Subject: soi disant soi dissent

From: And Rosta <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 17:32:32 +0100

Xod:
#> OTOH, doing what Nick proposes, and formalizing usage patterns into #documented conventions, will serve as explicit and warning testimony to
#> the fuckups that arise by leaving things to usage to decide.
#
#This wasn't left to usage intentionally, it was a mistake. 

The book/mahoste conflict was a mistake, but was the usage a mistake?

#The real
#problem is that vo'a was usually intended as long-distance when alone, and
#usually short-distance when used with soi. The obvious answer is to make
#it long-distance when there is no soi, and short when there is. 

If you look at all the usage Nick collected together, you also find short
distance vo'a not just with soi. 

#I want to
#be able to know certainly what vo'a means. And we would like to try to
#adhere to prior usage.

Nick's proposal adheres to prior usage.

Anyway, I won't carry on arguing for grungey vo'a.

--And.