BPFK Super-Section: BAI sumtcita
> Robin Lee Powell scripsit:
> > As jatna, I decree that we must produce definitions for all cmavo
> > that currently exist in the ma'oste, unless a compelling reason to
> > the contrary exists.
>
> Compound cmavo, however, are not cmavo. When the cmaste was designed,
> the intention was to include a sprinkling of frequently used compounds,
> *not* that the particular compounds chosen were themselves magic.
> Exception: the UI ru'e and UI nai compounds.
An example of a compound cmavo in the ma'oste that we definitely
don't want to define separately is {sozepimu}.
> > Because no-one's defined {bau nai}. Once we've figured out what
> > BAI+NAI means, I'm going to suggest that we either universally
> > include it, or universally don't, depending on what we decide on.
>
> CLL already defines BAI+NAI before the selbri: it's just contradictory
> negation.
That's basically how I would define it. More specifically, if
BAI = FIhO BRODA, then BAI NAI = FIhO NA BRODA
mu'o mi'e xorxes
__
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com