Re: TECH: only, {me} place structure

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

Seeing your posting on this to Lojban, I read it a bit more carefully and saw
that you indeed had called upon "srana".  But the "me" place structure as is
IS basically the one you propose, but with the shortening that "aspect"
which should be a "ka/property abstract" should actually give the 2nd place
of "srana" rather than repeat the srana.  I suspect that "in aspect "leka du"
would still work with the existing place structure, but I repeat my argument
based on Zipf in my private message to you:  "le du be [sumti]" is
shorter and clearer than "me [sumti] be leka du", and likewise for the
"srana" version of your proposal, whereas the existing place structure for
"me" does give a slight Zipfean advantage over using "srana"
"srana be [sumti] bei [leka aspect]" vs "me [sumti] <me'u> [leka aspect],
though it gives no advantage over "du" (which could be the selbri in the
main-selbri version of "me").

Thus I favor the status quo.

lojbab