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

From: "And Rosta" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:14:06 +0100

John:
> 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".

Yes. Xod & me compiled a list of reasons why eliding ce'u is a bad thing.
The discussions also noted that we can't elide Q-kau, or otherwise
indicated that an abstraction contains a Q-kau. The upshot: {ka}
doesn't earn its keep.

--And.