From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Sat Aug 21 09:08:52 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 21 Aug 2004 09:08:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web41908.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.159]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ByYQ7-0005vB-G4 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2004 09:08:43 -0700 Message-ID: <20040821160814.97197.qmail@web41908.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.43.74.96] by web41908.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 21 Aug 2004 09:08:14 PDT Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 09:08:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Jorge "Llambías" Subject: [lojban] Re: is minli irregular? To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <20040821153920.GA26995@fysh.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 8521 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --- Zefram wrote: > The Spanish definition gives the > regular place structure, with x3=standard and x4=subunits. That could mean either that the old definition was like that, or that I allowed my regularization tendency to prevail in this case. The English gismu list had a few changes made after the Spanish translation was done, so there may be minor differences in place structures. (One not so minor I detected recently was {tinsa}, which I had in Spanish as "x1 fills x2 with x3", which presumably was the old definition.) > Which definition is actually intended? I see no particular reason for > subunits to be relatively more important to {minli} than other unit words, > so this looks like an editorial error in the gismu list. Is it? Subunit places should "die in the arse", if I may use that expression. The place structures of non-SI units should be brought into line with the SI ones. When non-decimal subunits are needed, they are separated from the units with {pi'e}. > And a related irregularity: the definition of {rupnu} (local major > monetary unit) makes no mention of subunits. Is that intentional? > I'd say that subunits are quite frequently used with monetary units, > but of course they're mostly decimal-based subunits, so I can see why > the subunits places might have been omitted. Probably because of {fepni}. > (See what I'm up to at .) Nice summary page. mu'o mi'e xorxes __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail