From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Apr 28 06:46:59 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:47:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50)
	id 1DR9Lw-0005bP-Nr
	for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:46:52 -0700
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.196])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1DR9Lq-0005b5-Py
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:46:52 -0700
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so643175wri
        for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
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:content-disposition:references;
        b=YprotBGm7PN8oT+x7tPKSTADR/UD1khLZ6mplie6LJr9AoAg9ihB1Gl0I8UcftVE5RrXrS7c8RYJuRv/3nGJEw565GS27Ej6WBqsNrWiU4HsPnwFWY1G3ZvzlnbAdZVhMskbIkFojR+nl3KFIF1XFrhoWePbI6K64wQk4Hx3kuQ=
Received: by 10.54.120.9 with SMTP id s9mr739821wrc;
        Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.54.67.20 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <925d17560504280646259e8685@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:46:11 -0300
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: "zo'e" for selbri.
In-Reply-To: <20050428132810.46531.qmail@web81303.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20050428132810.46531.qmail@web81303.mail.yahoo.com>
X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--)
X-archive-position: 9884
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 4/28/05, John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > co'e
> >
> That is appropriately unspecified but not quite
> the "obvious or indifferent" force of {zo'e}.
> Possibly {go'i}, which repeats the previous bridi
> (or, since it can be modified in various ays,
> selbri) comes closer.  But it is a bit too
> precise (informative).  Nothing seem to match
> {zo'e} more exactly -- and we don't have the
> luxury of a blank (which best matches {co'e}).

A blank selbri is grammatical for the main bridi, though
not for subordinate bridi. 

{go'i} matches {ri}, and {co'e} matches {zo'e}. I'm not 
sure I understand what you say {co'e} lacks, but then we 
don't seem to agree about {zo'e} in the first place anyway 
so that's not surprizing.

mu'o mi'e xorxes