Subject: Re: [lojban] selma'o considered harmful

From: Jay Kominek <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 11:23:27 -0600 (MDT)

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, John Cowan wrote:

> Originally "du" was in its own selma'o, DU, and was permitted only
> as a selbri_B_132 (IIRC). But I somewhat hastily over-generalized it
> into selma'o GOhA, thus permitting some highly dubious constructs like
> tanru with du.

Highly dubious?

It seems like it could be useful to make quick and imperfect statements
about kinds of equality.

{mi junta du do}

I wouldn't advocate something like that for the logically stringent,
but it seems far more convinent than

{lo junta be mi du lo junta be do} or
{lo ni junta mi kei du lo ni junta do kei} or even
{mi du do tedu'i le ka junta}

Sigh. Of course, I'm probably missing something.

(I'll admit to not having any idea what good du would do as seltau,
however.)

- Jay Kominek <[email-masked]>
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose