Re: cmavo hit list - lojbab responds

[Logical Language Group <lojbab>]

la lojbab. pupu cusku di'e

> >> are back-referencing from within the sumti itself.  "le tavla be la goran
> >> bei ri" refers to some sumti previous toi the whole phrase since the
> >> reference is within a not-completed sumti.

la xorxes. pu cusku di'e

> >I would have said in that case {ri} is still {la goran}, since that
> >is the last complete sumti. I do agree that you can't get to {le tavla}
> >with ra, because it is not complete.
> >
> >How about in {le nu tavla la goran ri}? Again the {le nu..} is not complete,
> >so {ri} can't be {la goran}? I think this rule is too complicated, why not
> >let it be just the last complete one?

la lojbab. cusku di'e

> I'll let Cowan rule on this.  It has been discussed previously, I am sure,
> and I will agree with whatever was said before.  I could accept your
> understanding if it is consistent with history.

Based on his reading of history, (i.e. the draft textbook), Cowan rules
that Jorge is right in both his examples.  If "ri" is embedded within some
sumti, it cannot refer to the embedding sumti.  It can, however, refer to
other sumti embedded in the same embedding sumti.

If "ri" is a raisin in a cake, it can refer to another raisin in the same
cake, but not to the cake.

-- 
John Cowan		sharing account <lojbab@access.digex.net> for now
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.