BPFK Sections
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 03:03:46PM -0500, Adam D. Lopresto wrote:
> Would it make more sense to move the definition of {ke'a} out of
> Grammatical Pro-sumti and into Subordinators? It just seems
> rather odd to have the definitions so far apart, when they're
> pretty meaningless without each other.
I'd rather not break up selma'o if I can help it. Furthermore, as
those two sections are being handled together (at this very moment,
in fact), it doesn't much matter.
> Similarly for {ce'u} moving to Abstractors where it will be used.
> It's probably not a big problem the way it is, but it does seem
> like that would lead to more coherence.
Now that, on the other hand, I can do, ce'u being a selma'o un
to itself.
-Robin