[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
ba'e (was: kau)
la lojbab. cusku di'e
> The problem with ba'e appearing afterwards is that it is ambiguous as to
> interactions with other attitudinals. Would klama ba'e .ui mean that
> we were emphasizing and happy about klama, or that we were emphasizing
> klama and happy about the fact that we were emphasizing it.
But attitudinals in general already have this problem: see
Chapter 13, Example 19.1 (p. 312 in hard copy).
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan email@example.com
e'osai ko sarji la lojban
- Re: kau
- From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>