From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Aug 22 09:21:45 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 22 Aug 2005 09:21:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1E7F3R-0007uO-Iy for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 09:21:45 -0700 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.198]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1E7F3N-0007uC-G4 for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 09:21:45 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 55so1041362wri for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 09:21:40 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=Ms0DGWirIzPEHvXNTq+Z+qqEnbZvZX3DnKWcdksmZt3APqiTV5QPH5ZZ75566ZZMGbiVB8SJgvgFomaib0TX4a/EJ5XWYGjWcuuLygIRgOszdjQFzEBUxbE5oJVjORsYbAIKMNIv40e0Kjwe3Ky8tJxX5hgVh8KlqwhONqo65hU= Received: by 10.54.131.6 with SMTP id e6mr1526716wrd; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 09:21:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.125.8 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 09:21:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5ccdc753050822092175a2307b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:21:39 -0400 From: "la cuncuxnas." To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Why 16 In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_7436_26696295.1124727699986" References: X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 1821 X-Approved-By: thatskotkid@gmail.com X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: thatskotkid@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners ------=_Part_7436_26696295.1124727699986 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Heh. It's apparently a popular issue, Lojbanizing Scott. Depending on your= =20 pronunciation, {skot} or {skat} are the way to go. But that kind of thing= =20 can get boring, considering the ridiculous number of ways to make a name fo= r=20 yourself in Lojban. (But then, I'm a bit biased, having just finished the= =20 section in CLL about names.) Speaking of which: looking in the CLL, there's= =20 a quirky little rule about consonant pairs. Specifically, "It is forbidden= =20 for both consonants to be drawn from the set 'c', 'j', 's', 'z'." Given the= =20 difficulty in pronouncing {scot}, I can see why! mu'omi'e cuncuxnas. On 8/22/05, Newton, Philip wrote: >=20 > Scott Weller sigged: > > mu'o mi'e scot >=20 > Are you sure you want {scot} and not {skot}? {scot} seems a bit difficult= =20 > to > pronounce. >=20 > mu'o mi'e .filip. >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------=_Part_7436_26696295.1124727699986 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Heh.  It's apparently a popular issue, Lojbanizing Scott.  Depending on your pronunciation, {skot} or {skat} are the way to go.  But that kind of thing can get boring, considering the ridiculous number of ways to make a name for yourself in Lojban.  (But then, I'm a bit biased, having just finished the section in CLL about names.)  Speaking of which: looking in the CLL, there's a quirky little rule about consonant pairs.  Specifically, "It is forbidde= n for both consonants to be drawn from the set 'c', 'j', 's', 'z'." = ; Given the difficulty in pronouncing {scot}, I can see why!

mu'omi'e cuncuxnas.

On 8/22/05, Newton, Philip <Philip.Newton@gedas-onsite.de> wrote:=
Scott Weller sigged:
> mu'o mi'e scot

Are you sure you want {s= cot} and not {skot}? {scot} seems a bit difficult to
pronounce.

m= u'o mi'e .filip.




------=_Part_7436_26696295.1124727699986--