From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sun May 20 11:22:27 2007
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Sun, 20 May 2007 11:22:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63)	(envelope-from <nobody@digitalkingdom.org>)	id 1Hpq30-0004mP-L0	for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Sun, 20 May 2007 11:22:27 -0700
Received: from owlserv1.mail.rice.edu ([128.42.58.120])	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63)	(envelope-from <mls1@rice.edu>)	id 1Hpq2x-0004mB-W7	for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Sun, 20 May 2007 11:22:26 -0700
Received: by owlserv1.mail.rice.edu (Postfix, from userid 20515)	id DDD7513875; Sun, 20 May 2007 13:22:21 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from netscaler1.rice.edu (netscaler1.rice.edu [128.42.205.5]) 	by webmail.mail.rice.edu (IMP) with HTTP 	for <mls1@localhost>; Sun, 20 May 2007 13:22:21 -0500
Message-ID: <1179685341.465091dda984a@webmail.mail.rice.edu>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 13:22:21 -0500
From: mls1@rice.edu
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: distinction between gismu & cmavo
References: <2f91285f0705201027w32358e69v3e6093496d67cc5d@mail.gmail.com>  <200705202035.30924.todurov@gmail.com>  <2f91285f0705201055p656e17b8t9dbed4c1255eabdd@mail.gmail.com> <23dc8c770705201101s878b06did0bf0f672abc853e@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <23dc8c770705201101s878b06did0bf0f672abc853e@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis
X-Spam-Score: 0.7
X-Spam-Score-Int: 7
X-Spam-Bar: /
X-archive-position: 4541
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: mls1@rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-beginners

Quoting Karl Naylor <karl.org@gmail.com>:

> On 20/05/07, Vid Sintef <picos.picos@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But why are those cmavos like {mi} listed on the gismu list, then?
>
> I wondered about that too.  The impression I got is that certain cmavo
> that have semantic meanings (as opposed to affecting the grammar only)
> have been included in the gismu list so that one can search for them
> there.  However, I could be wrong.  If we're lucky we may get an
> answer from somebody who knows for sure :)
>
> In any case, as you probably know, you can recognise a gismu by its
> length and consonant/vowel composition: all gismu are of the form
> CVCCV or CCVCV, and no non-gismu words are.
>


So it is not possible for a fu'ivla to "accidentally" have CVCCV or CCVCV?