Magic Words
On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 04:45:01PM -0800, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:
>
> --- wikidiscuss@lojban.org wrote:
> > Re: Magic Words
> > Why, exactly, is BAhE + BU invalid? The Red Book (C19S16 as
> > usual) seems quite clear on this point:
> >
> > ``bu'' makes the preceding word into a lerfu word, except for
> > ``zo, ``si, ``sa, ``su, ``lo'u, ZOI cmavo, ``fa'o,
> > ``zei, BAhE cmavo, and ``bu. Multiple ``bu'' cmavo may be
> > used in succession.
>
> It is not invalid, it is an emphasized {bu}.
Umm, OK, then what does the {bu} eat?
So you're saying that {broda ba'e bu} is a very lerfu broda?
That possibility really never occured to me, and seems amazingly
bizarre and pointless. I can imagine uses for a lerfu based on ba'e
or za'e (with some effort) but I cannot imagine why one would want
to emphasize or nonce-ize bu itself whilst still retaining its
grammatical function.
-Robin
--
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"
Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/