From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Apr 17 14:58:52 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:58:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Luw5E-0003XB-K0 for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:58:52 -0700 Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.120]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Luw5B-0003WL-6p for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:58:52 -0700 Received: from chausie ([71.75.215.96]) by cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com with ESMTP id <20090417215842937.ECTG4341.cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:58:42 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chausie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BB981509 for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 17:58:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Pierre Abbat To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: du & mintu Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 17:58:40 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) References: <4de8c3930904170755t415ec77byc42e8417e7764b3f@mail.gmail.com> <49E8F2FB.2080602@perpetuum-immobile.de> <5715b9300904171425y5308e06dla2fd0c33542b09bb@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5715b9300904171425y5308e06dla2fd0c33542b09bb@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200904171758.40579.phma@phma.optus.nu> X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "chain.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Friday 17 April 2009 17:25:09 Luke Bergen wrote: > which would mean: "probably chan and en (interesting names) are indeed the > same in at least some way but not in every other way". Their mother would probably have found "Bunker" to be a strange name. They had no family name when they came here. [...] Content analysis details: (-2.6 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-archive-position: 1552 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: phma@phma.optus.nu Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Friday 17 April 2009 17:25:09 Luke Bergen wrote: > which would mean: "probably chan and en (interesting names) are indeed the > same in at least some way but not in every other way". Their mother would probably have found "Bunker" to be a strange name. They had no family name when they came here. > If you've used "da" earlier does "ro de" have "da" as part of that? Is > "da" included in "ro de"? da is included in rode, but that doesn't make the second part of the assertion false. "For the one Chang, for the one Eng, it is not the case that for all standards, they are identical by that standard." (There's a dispute about what "na" means if it's in one of two bridi-tails connected by a logical conjunction, but here it doesn't matter, since Chang and Eng are singular.) Pierre