From LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:59:53 2010 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 8 Jan 1993 07:13:01 -0500 Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5611; Fri, 08 Jan 93 07:12:09 EST Received: from CUVMB.BITNET by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4503; Fri, 08 Jan 93 07:11:51 EST Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 11:35:03 GMT Reply-To: C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK Sender: Lojban list From: C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK Subject: Re: TECH: se, te, & lujvo To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Fri Jan 8 11:35:03 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Message-ID: And says: > In _seljerna_, which can be broken down into se+l+jerna, the l indicates > diddling. Why use it, except to diddle? Several reasons: 1) It makes _seljerna_ one word rather than two. This is defined to be significant for cmavo such as ba'e, za'e, and zo. It also has, for me, a pragmatic significance which I can't at present define. 2) Since 'jerna' has no CVV or CCV affix, the only available forms are 'se jerna' and 'seljerna', but in the case of 'vasru' for example, 'selvasru' is by definition identical to 'selvau', but 'se vasru' cannot be changed in this way. > > Perhaps, then, _(y)ljerna_ yields a diddled lujvoid with the same x1 > as jerna. > Amusing idea, but highly ad hoc. Colin