From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat Sep 12 20:38:04 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Mmfub-0004y5-77 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:38:03 -0700 Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.121]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MmfuH-0004ws-6B for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:37:57 -0700 Received: from chausie ([71.75.215.96]) by cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com with ESMTP id <20090913033725230.YYBU5638@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> for ; Sun, 13 Sep 2009 03:37:25 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chausie (Postfix) with ESMTP id A12C6E516 for ; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:37:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Pierre Abbat To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: zo xi Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:37:21 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) References: <425e4ac20909121957k10d645a2o8d2c5a03bc3e7c59@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <425e4ac20909121957k10d645a2o8d2c5a03bc3e7c59@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200909122337.22867.phma@phma.optus.nu> X-archive-position: 16166 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: phma@phma.optus.nu Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Saturday 12 September 2009 22:57:12 Stela Selckiku wrote: > On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 6:45 PM, stevo wrote: > Hmm, well here is how I think of it: There are an infinite number of > da/de/di/ko'a/fo'a/etc available, because you can use anything as a > subscript. You don't have to start anywhere in particular; it would > be fine to start with da xi ci ze mu. While I would agree with you > that plain "da" is not necessarily identical to any particular > subscripted "da", it's also not necessarily unidentical to them! So > while I believe that our practice of starting with a subscripted two > is more of a habit than a rule, the reason for the habit is just to > make it abundantly clear that you are making a second distinct > reference. I think that "da" is unequal to "daxi" for all ny, and similarly for anything else in KOhA. But "daxipira'eci" is equal to "daxifi'uci". On the other hand, "faxipa" is equal to "fa", and "faxifi'uci" is meaningless. Pierre To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.