Re: TECH: grammar updates

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@GREBYN.COM>]

I suspect that it will come to be used to mean what it literally means
ko'a ne semau ko'e nelci ko'i
means that both ko'a and ko'e like ko'i, but that ko'a likes it more.
This is the non-restrictive use of semau, and is not rendered unacceptable
by anything discussed, nor is it really bad usage.  What we have eliminated
is a way to use "mau" such that it might imply it to be true of one thing
(ko'a) and not of the other (ko'e), which is the colloquial extension that
is commonly assumed.  I suspect that we will have quite a bit of work to
try to get people to avoid this usage with "ne" or "pe", given that there
is no Zipfean alternative.  We have a chance with sumti-raising primarily
BECAUSE we introduced an alternative that was as short as possible (thus
catering to Zipf) and not much longer than the alternative, while conveying
the much refined set of meanings.
  I have never urged that the "ne" meaning be suppressed or subsumed under
the less "logical" meaning, but rather that we have a Zipfeanly short
alternative so that we can put the two phrasings up against each other and
people can clearly see what the logical differences are between them
and the implicvations thereof.  If indeed the non-logical "semau" can always
be reasonable expressed some other short way, then it will be and the
addition to the language will see little use.  Otherwise, at least we will
have the distinction in the language that causes people to remember that they
need to think about the problem before speaking.

lojbab