Re: logical gaffs

[Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>]

Robin Turner writes:
>mi'o gugde cu nitcu X     (hope I've got the grammar right this time!)

Close, but you need an article for gugde.  {le mi'o gugde} or {lo mi'o =
gugde} or ...

>I would guess that a Lojban-speaker would automatically answer
>
>cu nitcu ko'a ma

{cu} separates the selbri from prior sumti; if there are no prior sumti, =
you don't need {cu}, and in fact, I think it's illegal.  {nitcu ko'a =
ma}, or {nitcu fi ma} or {ma te nitcu}. =20

>..  I would imagine this kind of thing [asking for filled-in places] =
would
>again be easier in Lojban.

Why?  We can ask "to what end?" in English just as easily as in Lojban, =
can't we?  You aren't the first person to make this observation, and I'm =
curious about the reasoning behind it.

co'o mi'e kris