Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Mon, 18 Oct 1993 15:15:01 -0400
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Mon, 18 Oct 1993 15:14:48 -0400
Message-Id: <199310181914.AA22832@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)    with BSMTP id 3049; Mon, 18 Oct 93 15:12:50 EDT
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with  BSMTP id 3401; Mon, 18 Oct 93 15:14:18 EDT
Date:         Mon, 18 Oct 1993 20:09:23 +0100
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: rely
X-To:         lojban@cuvma.BITNET
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
In-Reply-To:  (Your message of Sun, 17 Oct 93 07:38:08 D.)
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-From-Space-Date: Mon Oct 18 21:09:23 1993
X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET

> Here's an interesting one. lacri means x1 relies on x2.  How do you turn
> this around to form "reliable"?  You COULD say that se lacri means that
> x2 is POTENTIALLY reliable, but that is not how we typically use the
> word.  I have thought of (se) snadylacri, but to successfully-rely on
> something might merely mean that you overcame your doubts/better
> judgement.

Contrary to what Jorge has said, "reliable" does not mean "worthy
of being relied on". I suggest "snura zei lacri" - safely rely on.
Reliable is "selnurlacri".

------------
And.                KO JBOBANPEHO