Received: from 173-13-139-235-sfba.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([173.13.139.235]:39346 helo=jukni.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1casdd-0000b0-J7 for jbovlaste-admin@lojban.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 15:24:06 -0800 Received: by jukni.digitalkingdom.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 06 Feb 2017 15:24:01 -0800 From: "Apache" To: curtis289@att.net Reply-To: webmaster@lojban.org Subject: [jvsw] Definition Edited At Word gicmu -- By krtisfranks Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:24:01 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-Id: X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.5 X-Spam_score_int: 5 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: In jbovlaste, the user krtisfranks has edited a definition of "gicmu" in the language "English". Differences: 5,5c5,5 < This word is meant to have exactly the same meaning, notes, restrictions, associations, etc. as {gismu}; the two words are intended to be identicalnin every way except for four- and five-letter rafsi. The cmarafsi for this word are "-gim-" and "-gi'u-". Etymologically, this word should have been chosen rather than {gismu} (according to the CLL (see the gismu creation algorithm): https://lojban.github.io/cll/4/14/ step #5), but there was an error in the input; however, due to gimkamsmikezypro, these two forms are identical in meaning and every other characteristic or property or endowment, excepting associated rafsi options; the preferred version of all members of the "{gismu}" quotient group (presently "{gismu}" itself) determines the potential or actualized rafsi associated with that group; in this case (between "{gicmu}" and "{gismu}"), only the longer rafsi are affected (no cmarafsi of "{gismu}" use the "s"). --- > This word is meant to have exactly the same meaning, notes, restrictions, associations, etc. as {gismu}; the two words are intended to be identical in every way except for four- and five-letter rafsi (and the obvious phonetic/spelling difference). The cmarafsi for this word are "-gim-" and "-gi'u-". Etymologically, this word should have been chosen rather than {gismu} (according to the CLL (see the gismu creation algorithm): https://lojban.github.io/cll/4/14/ step #5), but there was an error in the input/transcription; however, due to gimkamsmikezypro, these two forms are identical in meaning and every other important characteristic or property or endowment, excepting associated rafsi options; the preferred version of all members of the "{gismu}" quotient/equivalence class (presently "{gismu}" itself) determines the potential or actualized rafsi associated with that class; in this case (between "{gicmu}" and "{gismu}"), only the longer rafsi are affected (no cmarafsi of "{gismu}" use the "s"). [...] Content analysis details: (0.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: lojban.org] 1.4 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: No description available. [173.13.139.235 listed in bb.barracudacentral.org] -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 1.0 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to internal network by host with dynamic-looking rDNS In jbovlaste, the user krtisfranks has edited a definition of "gicmu" in the language "English". Differences: 5,5c5,5 < This word is meant to have exactly the same meaning, notes, restrictions, associations, etc. as {gismu}; the two words are intended to be identicalnin every way except for four- and five-letter rafsi. The cmarafsi for this word are "-gim-" and "-gi'u-". Etymologically, this word should have been chosen rather than {gismu} (according to the CLL (see the gismu creation algorithm): https://lojban.github.io/cll/4/14/ step #5), but there was an error in the input; however, due to gimkamsmikezypro, these two forms are identical in meaning and every other characteristic or property or endowment, excepting associated rafsi options; the preferred version of all members of the "{gismu}" quotient group (presently "{gismu}" itself) determines the potential or actualized rafsi associated with that group; in this case (between "{gicmu}" and "{gismu}"), only the longer rafsi are affected (no cmarafsi of "{gismu}" use the "s"). --- > This word is meant to have exactly the same meaning, notes, restrictions, associations, etc. as {gismu}; the two words are intended to be identical in every way except for four- and five-letter rafsi (and the obvious phonetic/spelling difference). The cmarafsi for this word are "-gim-" and "-gi'u-". Etymologically, this word should have been chosen rather than {gismu} (according to the CLL (see the gismu creation algorithm): https://lojban.github.io/cll/4/14/ step #5), but there was an error in the input/transcription; however, due to gimkamsmikezypro, these two forms are identical in meaning and every other important characteristic or property or endowment, excepting associated rafsi options; the preferred version of all members of the "{gismu}" quotient/equivalence class (presently "{gismu}" itself) determines the potential or actualized rafsi associated with that class; in this case (between "{gicmu}" and "{gismu}"), only the longer rafsi are affected (no cmarafsi of "{gismu}" use the "s"). Old Data: Definition: $x_{1}$ is a (Lojban) root word expressing relation $x_{2}$ among argument roles $x_{3}$, with affix(es) $x_{4}$. Notes: This word is meant to have exactly the same meaning, notes, restrictions, associations, etc. as {gismu}; the two words are intended to be identicalnin every way except for four- and five-letter rafsi. The cmarafsi for this word are "-gim-" and "-gi'u-". Etymologically, this word should have been chosen rather than {gismu} (according to the CLL (see the gismu creation algorithm): https://lojban.github.io/cll/4/14/ step #5), but there was an error in the input; however, due to gimkamsmikezypro, these two forms are identical in meaning and every other characteristic or property or endowment, excepting associated rafsi options; the preferred version of all members of the "{gismu}" quotient group (presently "{gismu}" itself) determines the potential or actualized rafsi associated with that group; in this case (between "{gicmu}" and "{gismu}"), only the longer rafsi are affected (no cmarafsi of "{gismu}" use the "s"). Jargon: Gloss Keywords: Word: gismu, In Sense: Word: root word, In Sense: Place Keywords: New Data: Definition: $x_{1}$ is a (Lojban) root word expressing relation $x_{2}$ among argument roles $x_{3}$, with affix(es) $x_{4}$. Notes: This word is meant to have exactly the same meaning, notes, restrictions, associations, etc. as {gismu}; the two words are intended to be identical in every way except for four- and five-letter rafsi (and the obvious phonetic/spelling difference). The cmarafsi for this word are "-gim-" and "-gi'u-". Etymologically, this word should have been chosen rather than {gismu} (according to the CLL (see the gismu creation algorithm): https://lojban.github.io/cll/4/14/ step #5), but there was an error in the input/transcription; however, due to gimkamsmikezypro, these two forms are identical in meaning and every other important characteristic or property or endowment, excepting associated rafsi options; the preferred version of all members of the "{gismu}" quotient/equivalence class (presently "{gismu}" itself) determines the potential or actualized rafsi associated with that class; in this case (between "{gicmu}" and "{gismu}"), only the longer rafsi are affected (no cmarafsi of "{gismu}" use the "s"). Jargon: Gloss Keywords: Word: gismu, In Sense: Word: root word, In Sense: Place Keywords: You can go to to see it.