Received: from mail-gh0-f184.google.com ([209.85.160.184]:38278) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Uiehn-0006c8-2Z for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Fri, 31 May 2013 22:50:28 -0700 Received: by mail-gh0-f184.google.com with SMTP id f11sf68719ghb.1 for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 22:50:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=lYDo46mBIo0ptB2uMMVHBgAp9pHefpTUYCVmhSib4o0=; b=mfvAz3k2UvkEgzPtpwldqD4gDZ+r0dQPG3jPe3PK7MGr3Bph9oBB3J1O4kezHbhHnY 8vOBXoYdm9YcBH1woP9/Cov/bJsqUt4gqwiQvXxpeHVeqtZqHZnHjk6CC+yDiksoPGGD gSIpy8rgDZrWnK4RMa25oKqaDocIhnyAt8wjLcq8Fh0WGEAurzKyjGS8KIgJNOeS1lL0 m0DCSB5VHBSNrJ7QsYmZx3Ve3PW1ZUZQa8V1ir+fSUpbuu7iCddpOeO3irUJkEaQ040R qddtAVsGsdDCR/ROuWZH2BjKLM4rPSiyHGONzShC08n+XkUrp+udiOjaLoAfS/3ikulo 9L2Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-beenthere:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=lYDo46mBIo0ptB2uMMVHBgAp9pHefpTUYCVmhSib4o0=; b=WoflnsIugGpdGhkbLfiS0KfZq3/5gZQkpoO97h1qOaQRk4WciFNaOKKmghxgJLa036 TUT2BnhaDkmDiRV7V6xzCYle3o4OgsKY4ian+YZqTCvO3p1mkFMyhVPVI4q/4NJPGD1y X6UJUT0qMm2cg+oSnXTzrzGs56eXb0EAYMvPHrRJdZw5gD+pZ93fiVabDyPYntMEB1It 6c+jk4tcIOUK5KGqIYheWBw9E8RaiRCwXxdgVJhcXexviid45g1JaNL3pALXKM0dZSam n15A8X5iDYzMhxyQYmWIOgNqz9zL19PoCUy+rrOcW/tPt9jLU1DIyf4ht4e69aJWjRn+ 8efw== X-Received: by 10.50.41.104 with SMTP id e8mr818081igl.5.1370065812355; Fri, 31 May 2013 22:50:12 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.72.39 with SMTP id a7ls1025573igv.37.gmail; Fri, 31 May 2013 22:50:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.50.102 with SMTP id b6mr5265593igo.5.1370065811816; Fri, 31 May 2013 22:50:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-x22a.google.com (mail-ob0-x22a.google.com [2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22a]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i3si328698igh.2.2013.05.31.22.50.11 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 31 May 2013 22:50:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of nictytan@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22a as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22a; Received: by mail-ob0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id ef5so4456171obb.15 for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 22:50:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.182.129.129 with SMTP id nw1mr7131830obb.100.1370065811700; Fri, 31 May 2013 22:50:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.5.228 with HTTP; Fri, 31 May 2013 22:49:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Jacob Errington Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 01:49:51 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] A Question about GIJA To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" X-Original-Sender: nictytan@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of nictytan@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22a as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nictytan@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011765b706811e04de114ec0 X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --089e011765b706811e04de114ec0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 If we decide to refactor the connective system, could {gi mu'i} be made to mean the same thing as the clunky {gi'e mu'i bo} (which under GIJA would be {gi je mu'i bo} ? I can see this breaking the case where {broda gi'e mu'i brode}. However, maybe if we throw in a {bo}, everything becomes okay? e.g. {.i broda gimu'ibo brode}. I think this works, and doesn't break anything. Thoughts? .i mi'e la tsani mu'o -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. --089e011765b706811e04de114ec0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If we decide to refactor the connective system, could {gi = mu'i} be made to mean the same thing as the clunky {gi'e mu'i b= o} (which under GIJA would be {gi je mu'i bo} ? I can see this breaking= the case where {broda gi'e mu'i brode}. However, maybe if we throw= in a {bo}, everything becomes okay? e.g. {.i broda gimu'ibo brode}. I = think this works, and doesn't break anything.

Thoughts?

.i mi'e la tsan= i mu'o

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 
--089e011765b706811e04de114ec0--