de'i li 07 pi'e 02 pi'e 2010 la'o fy. Ian Johnson .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
> Hmm...first, I don't quite see why it's "lo" here. To me if you can give
> something a name (which in this case I can, though I won't for privacy
> reasons) le is definitely warranted. But of course I'm here because I'm a
> beginner, so I could be wrong; can you explain why lo seems fitting to you?
.skamyxatra
I just used it because it's the default {gadri}. If you're learning Lojban via
either *Lojban for Beginners* or *{la lojban. mo}/What is Lojban?*, both of
these (last time I checked) describe the {gadri} ("{lo}," "{le}," "{la}," and
some other uncommon ones) as they were specified in *The Complete Lojban
Language* in 1997. However, in 2004, the definition of "{lo}" was changed from
"a thing which truly is..." to "a thing associated with...". Along with the
other minor changes made to the {gadri} at the same time, you can find more
information on this at
<http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=How+to+use+xorlo>. As a
result, "{lo}" is now the preferred {gadri} to use whenever in doubt, and it is
always acceptable to use "{lo}" wherever "{le}" can be used.
> However, using se fanmo to me seems like it opens up some problems. It's
> quite possible that this is just malglico, but based on the place structure
> of ckule (in particular the location being x2), it seems that the x1 place
> of ckule is not the school process, but the institution. Thus using se
> fanmo, which seems to imply that ckule is a process, seems...odd. Of course,
> I have not seen fanmo in usage, so I could be wrong as above.
The definition of {fanmo} is "x1 is an end/finish/termination of thing/process
x2", i.e., its x2 can be either a process or a thing, which is what {lo ckule}
is.
mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun.
--
ne'i le vo'a zdani be bu'u la rliex. la noi morsi .ktulxus. senva denpa
