From cowan@ccil.org Mon Aug 13 05:55:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: cowan@mercury.ccil.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 13 Aug 2001 12:55:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 43592 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 12:55:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Aug 2001 12:55:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mercury.ccil.org) (192.190.237.100) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Aug 2001 12:55:53 -0000 Received: from cowan by mercury.ccil.org with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 15WHGJ-0000aL-00; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 08:56:07 -0400 Subject: Re: [lojban] {kai'i} In-Reply-To: from Invent Yourself at "Aug 13, 2001 06:11:25 am" To: Invent Yourself Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 08:56:07 -0400 (EDT) Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: X-eGroups-From: John Cowan From: John Cowan Invent Yourself scripsit: > Are you stating that ce'u can be elided because it's always assumed to be > in the first empty place? The Book examples indicate otherwise, unless I > am mistaken. No, it can be elided because people are capable of glorking its presence from context, like any other elision. There is no requirement that the elision be from the x1 place. > What is there is sufficiently contradictory that I have agreed with And > Rosta's argument that ce'u should always be used with ka. Then ka becomes > redundant, except where the kam- rafsi is used. Redundancy is a Good Thing. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore --Douglas Hofstadter