[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: TECH: new cmavo "ju'e"
- To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu (Lojban List)
- Subject: Re: TECH: new cmavo "ju'e"
- Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 09:41:20 -0500 (EST)
- In-Reply-To: <199512061203.HAA26414@locke.ccil.org> from "Logical Language Group" at Dec 6, 95 06:52:13 am
la lojbab. cusku di'e
> Even WITH the current design, there are no JOIK equivalents
> for GUhEks and GIhEks (forethought tanru and bridi-tail connection).
Jorge has proposed (his X2) the use of GI+JOI as a non-logical gihek.
I'm still mulling this in conjunction with his X4.
> Jorge's proposal to allow JE the full range of usage of JOI is
> unacceptable.
I agree. Proposal X3 is rejected.
--
John Cowan cowan@ccil.org
e'osai ko sarji la lojban.