Re: TECH: grammar updates

[C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK]

THus lojbab:
>
> If the result of the debate is that "mau" goes away, then we are making a
> significant change in the language, since it is one of the more used
> cmavo, to my recollection, as well as one that dates back to Loglan.
>
> I thus suspect that there must be a way developed that allows the pragmatic
> abbreviation implict in the cmavo, and that there will be opposition from
> the conservative forces otherwise (unless this is "slipped by" on them,
> which I cannot support).


I would say, let's not take it away, but let's discourage its use. (Indeed,
at one level, it could even be used in teaching in a sort of "This is one
way you might try and do this, and some people do, but let's look at
what it really means").
 As I've remarked before, there are whole swathes of older versions that
are no longer regarded as kosher, most noteably implicit sumti-raising.

        Colin