Re: What the *%$@ does "nu" mean?

[JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

cu'u la kris
>.i .ieru'e .i do tavla la lojbab fo la lojban fi lenu la lojbab na se =
>tavla ma'a fo la lojban

i la lojbab ja'a se tavla i ji'a go'i va'o le nu ly na jundi

>(vo'o =3D 4th argument of main bridi, vo'e =3D 2nd argument of main =
>bridi, no'a =3D selbri of main bridi.  I've never used these before, and =
>I admit their use seems a bit cryptic here (+ I'm not 100% sure I'm =
>using them right).  But pe'i these words are their most useful when the =
>argument they refer to is either very long or unstated; otherwise it =
>would be easier to just repeat the sumti.)

Since no'a already picks up the sumti of the main bridi (unless explicitly
overridden) using vo'o and vo'e was just adding noise pe'i. But what
confused me was that you were using tavla as something that depends
on the volition of le se tavla rather than of le tavla.

co'o mi'e xorxes