From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat Jun 03 08:58:48 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Sat, 03 Jun 2006 08:58:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FmYWW-0002sQ-Ke for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2006 08:58:48 -0700 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.239]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FmYWU-0002sJ-1p for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2006 08:58:48 -0700 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i7so728442wra for ; Sat, 03 Jun 2006 08:58:45 -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:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Fmbi/5jAlWnEHsFlLWsk6TSnacxTCB9jpssAE30HbSxXGf5oNKARlgP2LRKUL5IC3bAEp/9kbQqFZPcFACw2AoPGdaXoFD4S8mdt2Jf03IZhApAzNt5C3zAZNW2uHqVP/sQO8J+L/hT97TGQPYC1bXgRHubORbOD/WosrV4WMUg= Received: by 10.64.220.10 with SMTP id s10mr971203qbg; Sat, 03 Jun 2006 08:58:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.65.237.19 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 08:58:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d17560606030858n362e8914k6ae278e1a516dfcb@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:58:45 -0300 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: another song In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <037C2EFE-4291-4B0F-A165-02CA9F092142@mac.com> <925d17560606030734t6ed6c599xb24e1eb5c3a01443@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 3212 X-Approved-By: jjllambias@gmail.com X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On 6/3/06, Matt Arnold wrote: > It sounds like {.oinai} to me, not {.uinai}. > -epkat I definitely hear {.ui}, although in an [uj] version rather than the more common [wi]. ({oinai} would be kind of contradictory, wouldn't it?) mu'o mi'e xorxes