From araizen@newmail.net Wed Aug 07 14:20:48 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 7 Aug 2002 21:20:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 84079 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2002 21:20:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 7 Aug 2002 21:20:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n23.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.79) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Aug 2002 21:20:47 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.180] by n23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Aug 2002 21:20:41 -0000 Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2002 21:20:41 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: zo xruti xruti Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1017 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "araizen" X-Originating-IP: 172.195.98.75 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=3063669 X-Yahoo-Profile: araizen la xorxes. cusku di'e > The arguments are basically these: The only argument against that I know of is that it's probably a baseline change. I agree that the current place structure is completely broken, and I personally always use 'xruti' non- agentively; however, since it is a baseline change I don't think that the definition should be changed. Everyone is encouraged to use 'xruti' non-agentively (which shouldn't be very hard), and hopefully at the the baseline period, or whenever the gismu are defined in lojban, the only naturaly possibility will be to make 'xruti' non-agentive. It might be possible to slip the change in 'xruti' in as a change which was agreed upon, but for whatever reason not implemented, in which case 'xruti' would be an exception. However, the point still stands in relationship to other broken parts of the baseline. If you make official baseline changes, some people will say that 'they're still changing the language' and refrain from learning it. mu'o mi'e .adam.