Subject: [lojban] Re: sticky hypothesis

From: Jordan DeLong <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 14:53:02 -0500

On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 09:46:34PM +0200, Lionel Vidal wrote:
> xorxes:
[...]
> BTW, the fact that the book does not support the proposed use
> of {ru'a} is not a problem: it is grammatical, it may add a useful
> feature or an ease of expression without introducing any
> contradiction, and I am almost sure I would have guessed
> the purpose of the construct while first reading it (ok I may
> be biased here :-)}

I sure wouldn't have. I see "ru'anai" as similar to "da'inai".
You're saying that it's not an assumption, not ending a group of
sentences which were an assumption. It is grammatical, yes, but
it also already has a meaning which is *not* for scoping text.

-- 
Jordan DeLong - [email-masked]
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku