Re: subordinate interrogatives

["Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>]

>Date:         Mon, 25 Nov 1996 15:33:39 GMT+0
>From: And Rosta <a.rosta%UCLAN.AC.UK@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
>Organization: University of Central Lancashire
>
>{kuau} is just an alternative to {loy duu}. It is not approved by
>Lojban Central, because it is motivated solely by conceptual
>elegance, and not by dire need.
>The issue Jorge address is: What is the logical alternative to the
>colloquial {mo kaw}? [& Xorxes gives the answer.]

Your orthography gets harder to follow by the month.  Why "kuau" for
"ku'au" but "kaw" for "kau"?  Why isn't it "kuaw"?  At least be
consistent.  And what do you get by "loy" instaed of "loi"?  Oh, loi for
lo'i?  It doesn't look to me like you're gaining anything but your own
aesthetics, which doesn't seem reason enough to change a writing system
that others are using beyond recognition (you don't go to France and say
"You know what, guys?  That cedilla is really dumb; from now on I'm writing
it with an s.")  Then again, I hypocritically support "h" as an alloglyph
for ' in Lojban.  Go figure.

~mark