From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Thu Aug 16 13:53:02 2001
Return-Path: <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 16 Aug 2001 20:53:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 25962 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 20:53:01 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27)
  by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Aug 2001 20:53:01 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mta06-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.46)
  by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Aug 2001 20:53:01 -0000
Received: from andrew ([62.253.89.16]) by mta06-svc.ntlworld.com
  (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP
  id <20010816205300.NDDQ6330.mta06-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew>
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:53:00 +0100
Reply-To: <a.rosta@ntlworld.com>
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] On dropping {du'u} or {ka}
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:52:06 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMEEFIEJAA.a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <3d.1015fed3.28ad522d@aol.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Importance: Normal
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>

pc:
> The logical thing to do is drop {du'u} if one is to go. {ka} is the general
> case, n-adic relations, while {du'u} is the special medadic case. Of course,
> that requires all {ce'u} to be in place.

By current understanding, the difference between ka and du'u is precisely that
ka is guaranteed to contain a ce'u which may or may not be elided. If ce'u
were unelidable then ka and du'u would be entirely equivalent, and the
rationale for dropping du'u would be that ka is a syllable shorter.

> And all the places of proposition to be filled.
> Logic regularly keeps both to allow conventions to deal with
> frequent cases at considerable savings in space and time.

I don't understand.

--And.