Subject: Re: [lojban] {kai'i}

From: Invent Yourself <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 21:46:38 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, John Cowan wrote:

> And Rosta scripsit:
> > Recent distinct threads have established
> >
> > (a) that {ka} is redundant, since {du'u} can serve all the
> > functions of current {ka}
>
> It is redundant only in a version of Lojban where you are not permitted
> to elide "ce'u".

To justify a new cmavo (ka) only to avoid the confusion from eliding
another one (ce'u) seems wasteful and actually un-Lojbanic. It sticks out
from the language at a weird angle; is there any other such case of such
redundancy in the cmavo? It seems a lot more elegant to actually ditch ka,
with the exception of lujvo.

-----
"I have never been active in politics or in any act against occupation,
but the way the soldiers killed Mizyed has filled me with hatred and
anger. Now I'm ready to carry out a suicide attack inside Israel,"
one of the witnesses said.