[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 11:11:20PM -0500, Jordan DeLong wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 01:59:35PM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> > # And Rosta scripsit:
> > # > Refresh my memory, for BPFK purposes. There are competing views about
> > # > whether the rules for identifying the antecedent for {ri} are, or should be,
> > # > vague or precise. But has anybody proposed precise rules for ra and ru?
> > #
> > # They are deliberately imprecise.
> >
> > I know, John. I just want to make sure that as BF shepherd I take
> > account of all proposals & povs. (Is "povs" the plural of "pov"?)
> [...]
>
> What john said, except to note that ra is almost always (always?)
> going to be the one immediately before the ri.
I just realized that the reason you put "Jordan: please read" on
this is because you were confusing this with regard to my view on
lerfu pro-sumti. IIRC, maybe John (but definitely also xorxes)
think they're entirely whack-ass random (glorked), where I think
that unless assigned with goi they always refer to the immediately
previous term starting with the corresponding letter(s).
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@hidden.email
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
binvdkUQMQ5iG.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped