From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat May 31 08:46:28 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Sat, 31 May 2008 08:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K2THo-0005Ex-MT for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Sat, 31 May 2008 08:46:28 -0700 Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.36]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K2THj-0005Eb-Fm for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Sat, 31 May 2008 08:46:28 -0700 Received: from MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.4.) id d.c68.29db5919 (29679) for ; Sat, 31 May 2008 11:46:11 -0400 (EDT) From: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Message-ID: Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 11:46:10 EDT Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Fwd: the gismu typos To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_c68.29db5919.3572ccc2_boundary" X-Spam-Flag:NO X-Spam-Score: 0.7 X-Spam-Score-Int: 7 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 622 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners --part1_c68.29db5919.3572ccc2_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/31/2008 04:22:12 AM Central Daylight Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes: > > I don't understand, why would you want to change these? are they > > wrong? i'm confused. > > If I remember right, there were some typos/errors made when the gismu > were being created. So, for example I think {gismu} was meant to be > {gicmu}. The change would be an attempt to "go back" to what the > gismu-making algorithm originally made. > The words are what they are. There would be no point to changing, for whatever reason, and much confusion would result. Their argument structures (is there a better word for this?) is another matter. stevo --part1_c68.29db5919.3572ccc2_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 5/31/2008 04:22:12 AM Cen= tral Daylight Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes:


> I don't understand, wh= y would you want to change these? are they
> wrong? i'm confused.

If I remember right, there were some typos/errors made when the gismu &n= bsp;
were being created.  So, for example I think {gismu} was meant to b= e  
{gicmu}.  The change would be an attempt to "go back" to what the &= nbsp;
gismu-making algorithm originally made.

The words are what they are.  There would be no point to changing, f= or whatever reason, and much confusion would result.  
Their argument structures (is there a better word for this?) is another=20= matter.

stevo
--part1_c68.29db5919.3572ccc2_boundary--