Re: TECH: SE rafsi omitted in lujvo (was Re: dikyjvo, too,

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

After thinking about it, I am inclined to agree with you - with one provision:
xekskapi can be a perfectly good word, but it has the places implied by the
final term, which are backwards to the English.  X is the black skin of Y
or X is the skin of black (person?) Y.  This should be allowed as an alternative
and may be preferred in some cases, since you end up with the same places
(I think) just in a non-standard order. If the result otherwise might be
hyphens (not true in this case, but presume so for the example:)
se xekskapi
might be preferable to
xekselskapi
especially if there is frequent occassion to fill in both places instead of
1, if the final term is one that already tends to be "fa"d like cumki, or
maybe iun general when the word is used more in a main selbri than in a
description.

lojbab