WikiDiscuss

WikiDiscuss


BPFK Section: Case sumtcita

posts: 2388

So you are saying tht you did not invent these
forms by a mechanical device, but someone else
did. It is not who did it but that it was done
that I object to. As for what are the new ones,
I would say all that have been added to the old
list for reasons other than actual usage.


<rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 12:58:44PM -0700, John
> E Clifford wrote:
> > Aside from pointlessness, all of these assume
> without any visible
> > justification a certain relationship both
> with the "corresponding"
> > brivla to the BAI and between the resulting
> sentence and one in
> > which that brivla plays a role as a brivla.
> These connection are
> > not supported by the core group of BAI, so
> suing them to create
> > new ones is an innovation which seems bound
> to lead to the kinbds
> > of pointless muddles here shown.
>
> You keep saying "new ones".
>
> There is not a single BAI or BAI* in BPFK
> consideration that is not
> already in the ma'oste; I know this for a fact
> because that's what I
> used to generate the current list.
>
> So, what "new ones" are you talking about?
>
> -Robin
>
>
>
>