From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Sep 11 15:58:54 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 11 Sep 2002 15:58:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17pGRf-0006H0-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 15:58:51 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 15:58:51 -0700 From: Robin Lee Powell To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: word for "www" (was: Archive location.) Message-ID: <20020911225851.GB23949@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <17a.e5c1bc2.2ab10ee6@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17a.e5c1bc2.2ab10ee6@aol.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 1165 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 05:25:58PM -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 9/11/2002 12:42:43 PM Central Daylight Time, > lojban-out@lojban.org writes: > > << > > It is not the case that the whole point of lujvo is that someone > > > should be able to dissect them and figure out what you mean. The whole > > > point of lujvo is that they are words formed from parts that have > > > independent meaning within Lojban, but with a meaning that is not > > > equivalent to the sum of their parts. Their dissectablity is not their > > > point. > > > > OK. What is their point? > >> > Now who is being deliberately obtuse? Obtuse, maybe. Deliberately, no. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno je xlali -- RLP http://www.lojban.org/