From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Tue Aug 21 08:51:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 21 Aug 2001 15:51:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 46448 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 15:45:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 21 Aug 2001 15:45:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta1 with SMTP; 21 Aug 2001 15:45:15 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:23:52 +0100 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:50:41 +0100 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:50:33 +0100 To: lojban Subject: ce'u xi Re: [lojban] Toward a {ce'u} record Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline From: And Rosta Pierre to John to ?pc:: #> > For this and general #> > reasons, I suggest that {ce'u}, like KOhA generally, be taken as havin= g #> > implicit subscripts (starting with 0) assigned in left to right order. #> #> I think this convention is overkill, though of course I cannot consisten= tly #> say it is outright wrong. # #Would ce'uxipa and ce'uxire apply to two sumti such that the property is a= =20 #relationship between them, or would they apply to different levels of nest= ed=20 #ka? The latter, I think, in that I very very vaguely recall that in the very la= te=20 stages of Refgram composition it was decided that xi subscripts coindex=20 a ka and each of the ce'u that the ka defines a relationship between. I=20 may be confusing this with ke'a, but the two should be equivalent. OTOH,=20 I may be remembering totally wrongly, and it might in fact be more useful=20 to do things the following way: (1) if there are nested ka, put the ce'us in the prenexes of the ka bridi they belong to, and refer back to them anaphorically (e.g. by goiko'a in the prenex). (2) use subscripts for nonidentical ce'u in the same ka bridi (3) Consider whether bare ce'u =3D (a) "ce'u xi pa" or (b) "ce'u xi n+1". (4) Consider going for (b) (=3D status quo) but using ke'a as an equivalent of ce'u xi pa. --And.