lujvo paper

[fschulz@PYRAMID.COM]

la Nick ciska

>[Re {ne'e}]
>
>}Since Nick has done the bulk of the place structure work that will appear in
>}the first dictionary, I am bound by necessity to defer to him on the use of
>}a cmavo in analyzing place structures.  If, as he says, the usage is only
>}pedagogical, probably the better approach is to NOT add the cmavo to the
>}language and NOT use it in the place structure paper, but instead use a
>}different pedagogical method to explain what is happening when you eliminate
>}a place.
>
>Fair enough. Since I never intended an official cmavo out of it anyway, I'll
>reword the paper appropriately, to avoid using a xo'e.
>

I found that rewriting a lujvo using xo'e to show place structure
removal to be a clever pedagogical device. Seeing a xo'e expansion
gave me a flash of understanding that no amount of explanatory
text could ever achieve. The xo'e usage was my favorite part of
the paper and I strongly protest removing xo'e. This one usage
is enough to justify giving xo'e an official cmavo.

Removing xo'e from the lujvo paper would be a major loss
for future lojan learners. Please reconsider.
--
        Frank Schulz ( fschulz@pyramid.com )