Wiki page BPFK Section: Epistemology sumtcita changed
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:41:22 -0800 (PST), John
> E Clifford
> <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > Yeah, that will work eventually, but is not
> very
> > Zipfy. And it still leaves the question of
> > restricting scope within the sentence --
> > preferrably without throwing everything into
> > prenex form.
>
> There's {zo'au} for afterthought postnex:
>
<http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Experimental+anaphorics&bl>
>
& is at his opaque best here. After two
readings, it is not clear how a large part of
this is more than abbreviatory nor how the (very
useful, though still not adequate) postnex
interacts with preneces. I think these are
discussed but, as I said, they are not clear.