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


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

Re: [jboske] lo'e gadri: can we converge towards a resolution?



cu'u la xorxes.
I would like to make two further proposals (I want them to be
taken jointly, not separately):

* cmavo for Average are lo'e & le'e
* cmavo for Unique are loi'e & lei'e and are made official.

I would prefer the reverse assignment, so that usage is not
invalidated.

At which point I say ex cathedra that if usage turns out to be only your usage, it is not a sufficient argument. It has to be a plurality of Lojbanists' usage. If you are the only one to have used lo'e extensively, that still cannot count.

Yes, this is adversarial, and I may well be wrong about you being the only user. But those are the ground rules for the BPFK.
--
**** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****
* Dr Nick Nicholas,  French & Italian Studies       nickn@hidden.email *
  University of Melbourne, Australia             http://www.opoudjis.net
*    "Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity of locutional rendering, the       *
  circumscriptional appelations are excised." --- W. Mann & S. Thompson,
* _Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organisation_, 1987.    *
**** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****