From phma@oltronics.net Fri Sep 22 10:44:47 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_0_2); 22 Sep 2000 17:44:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 10364 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2000 17:44:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Sep 2000 17:44:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO neofelis.ixazon.lan) (207.15.133.16) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Sep 2000 17:44:44 -0000 Received: by neofelis.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 500) id C0A203C587; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:35:01 -0400 (EDT) To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Get Much Ca$h ! Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:31:46 -0400 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.29.2] Content-Type: text/plain References: <20000922172448.CD55926333@mail.taral.net> In-Reply-To: <20000922172448.CD55926333@mail.taral.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <00092213350117.00920@neofelis> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com From: Pierre Abbat On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Taral wrote: > >According to the EBNF grammar xref, NOI is in relative_clause_122, which >has terminator KUhO. I ran my post through jbofi'e and it parsed it without complaining about a missing KUhO or anything else. >> As to the missing attitudinal, I don't have the hang of attitudinals yet and >> was too busy looking up other words. > >Actually, "me" is not an attitudinal. It changes sumti into simple >selbri: x1 is one of the referents of "[sumti]". It turns out, however, >that I was wrong about its use there. :) Sorry for the confusion. I was answering Robin's message. phma