From rspeer@MIT.EDU Mon May 26 10:15:23 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 26 May 2003 10:15:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fort-point-station.mit.edu ([18.7.7.76]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19KLZ7-0007f2-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 26 May 2003 10:15:17 -0700 Received: from grand-central-station.mit.edu (GRAND-CENTRAL-STATION.MIT.EDU [18.7.21.82]) by fort-point-station.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h4QHFGYY010434 for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 13:15:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (MELBOURNE-CITY-STREET.MIT.EDU [18.7.21.86]) by grand-central-station.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h4QHFFwj023890 for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 13:15:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from torg.mit.edu (TORG.MIT.EDU [18.243.1.228]) ) by melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h4QHFFU8022892 for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 13:15:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rob by torg.mit.edu with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19KLZ4-0000bD-00 for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 13:15:14 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 13:15:14 -0400 From: Rob Speer To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: emotions Message-ID: <20030526171514.GA2264@mit.edu> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030525081407.03168210@pop.east.cox.net> <5.2.0.9.0.20030526103502.03bb0290@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030526103502.03bb0290@pop.east.cox.net> X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i X-archive-position: 5418 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rspeer@MIT.EDU Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 10:46:12AM -0400, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > At 12:48 PM 5/26/03 +0100, And Rosta wrote: > >It's disyllabic. There is no shortage of bisyllabic cmavo space. > > No one has been hurt, so far as I know, by "le du'u"/"le se du'u" and > "la'edi'u" being longer than one syllable, and I can imagine few things > that need a shorter one. Does it fit within the BPFK guidelines to make "lau" mean "la'edi'u"? Sure, it's an arbitrary change that has no usage so far, but for one thing it would be very useful, and for another thing "lau" has never had any usage anyway, and I can't even imagine what it would be used for. -- mu'o mi'e rab.spir