[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: TECH: SE rafsi omitted in lujvo (was Re: dikyjvo, too,

I think we have to be careful in using seltanru and tertanru in talking about
the effects of "se".  If you have only two terms, the expalnations in temrs
of those two wrods seem clear.

I would like to see Nick and others argue about cases where you have a 3
or better, a 4 place lujvo, which is where people are going to feel evebn
more pressure to drop "se"s from the lujvo structure, and you also have
more places than just two to consider.

Not having looked closely, I hope Nick has talked about >2-piece lujvo
in his papers, perhaps even extensively as the problems get very intricate
(a 4 place lujvo may be 'composed' of 4 free gismu, of two 2-term lujvo,
a 3-termer and a gismu, etc. all in a variety of orders.  Ins ome of these
the "se" may really be necessary to avoid confusion; indeed, some may
require the "ke" and evn the "ke'e" appear in the lujvo to avoid conflict
with some other rationale lujvo interpretation (I'm not sure that
anyone  will quickly come up with an example of these - though the way it
will happen will surely be to use lujvo in combination with each other to form