From sentto-44114-14881-1028334767-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Fri Aug 02 17:33:21 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 02 Aug 2002 17:33:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n33.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.101]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 17amr9-0006Ix-00 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Fri, 02 Aug 2002 17:33:19 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-14881-1028334767-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.201] by n33.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Aug 2002 00:32:48 -0000 X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 3 Aug 2002 00:32:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 69425 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2002 00:32:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Aug 2002 00:32:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n11.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.66) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Aug 2002 00:32:46 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.179] by n11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Aug 2002 00:32:46 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7d.2b30bbd9.2a7c46c7@aol.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "araizen" X-Originating-IP: 172.194.79.100 X-Yahoo-Profile: araizen MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 00:32:46 -0000 Subject: [lojban] Re: LogFest Phone Game results Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 411 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: araizen@newmail.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list la pycyn. cusku di'e > The English from 1) wanders way off (but it is not clear what sticking close > would be), but the Lojban 2 follows it pretty well (-mei2 is strictly a set, > not a mass, but why fuss?) except that the relative clause wants to modify > {remei}, not {loi prenu} -- it is the members of the pairs, not of the mass > of people, that can finish eachother's sentences. (probably, each one > individually, {ro jufra} rather than the set all at once -- the ends of sets > can't be said). The original was "lo'e jufra", which is a Llambian archetype, not a set. mu'o mi'e .adam. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Access Your PC from Anywhere - Free Trial http://us.click.yahoo.com/o5uw2C/0ncEAA/Ey.GAA/GSaulB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/