From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sun Mar 27 15:02:07 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:02:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DFglb-0003Tg-UN for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:01:59 -0800 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.194]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DFglY-0003TO-Ks for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:01:59 -0800 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so178056wri for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:01:25 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=Me/TcPHIsutVczE1ejnD9OYeWqUpd3kuUIvfSCKQTzxCEWb134q17Rjq5M4QpoVq272gZUJv26pqMSI3WI4L6PlrCbjH244Zh0p83X4smO6Xyn1jsi9pTZxanhoTYXy0Gx1/s91I3zfLeY4xxEYJCYHmenu/zL1nShtN6yrSEJk= Received: by 10.54.22.19 with SMTP id 19mr1853310wrv; Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:01:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.54.69.3 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:01:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <925d175605032715014e381357@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 20:01:24 -0300 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: New to Lojban and a question In-Reply-To: <20050327200806.GX10094@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <20050326194416.60028.qmail@web60502.mail.yahoo.com> <537d06d005032705071496f143@mail.gmail.com> <20050327180029.GW10094@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <4246F819.6080209@lojban.org> <20050327200806.GX10094@chain.digitalkingdom.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 9682 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:08:06 -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 01:14:49PM -0500, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > > I am led again to think that we may > > need a gismu for the "exclusive" sense of "only" that might apply > > here. But far be it from me to propose new gismu %^) > > I think it's quite a nice idea, actually. Isn't that what {selte'i} means? "x1 is/are the only one(s) with property x2 among x3". Or what is the "exclusive" sense of "only"? http://jbovlaste.lojban.org//dict/selte'i mu'o mi'e xorxes