[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >

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

Re: [engelang] Xorban multivar bindings; "complements"

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@hidden.email> wrote:

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Mike S. <maikxlx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, let's definitely do this. Let's change "f-" to a unary operator, and
> approve ju as well.

I have changed f- to operator.

Good!
 
Now the question is, do we want to
change b- as well?

Changing f- has solved the multiple fV issue, since now it is clear
what "fa fe fi crvo'e" means, "A is the state of affairs in which E is
the state of affairs in which I is the state of affairs in which it
rains". Pointless but not meaningless.

Yes, there's a distinct feeling that you know you're getting things right when silly things like that clear up.
 

But what about multiple bV? If we change bV to an operator then "ba be
tvla'eka" means "A makes E make us talk to A", which would not be very
clear with babe as arguments. Yes?

 Please hold off a day or two, I have a proposal for that one in the works.