Re: TECH: PROPOSED GRAMMAR CHANGE 38: lambda via new selma'o CEhU

mi joi la .and. cusku be di'e casnu

> > Because lojbab noted that [du'u] could be brought into NU by changing
> > "du'u" to "le du'u".
> 
> !! Okay, yes - after all, it is true that it could be brought into NU.
> But why was it thought a good thing (bearing in mind that it very much
> isn't)?

Simplicity and uniformity.

> Can we move it back, please? [I will assume the answer is that
> the milk is split & it's too late to mop it up.]

Yes, plus simplicity and uniformity.  There is no Lojban mechanism that
takes a bridi and makes it a sumti; it always passes through a selbri
stage first.  (Quotators don't count: their operands are texts or words
or noises/marks.)

-- 
John Cowan					cowan@ccil.org
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.