From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Wed Nov  3 16:41:28 1993
Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 3 Nov 1993 21:44:16 -0500
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 3 Nov 1993 21:44:13 -0500
Message-Id: <199311040244.AA06036@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)    with BSMTP id 2567; Wed, 03 Nov 93 21:44:05 EST
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with  BSMTP id 7011; Wed, 03 Nov 93 21:43:47 EDT
Date:         Wed, 3 Nov 1993 21:41:28 EST
Reply-To: Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: TECH: more thoughts on zi'o
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Status: RO
X-Status: 

la and cusku di'e

> Ziho changes the meaning in an only partly guessable way.
>
> What we shd be deciding is not whether a place is zihoable (every place
> is) but whether it is likely to be zihoed very very often (assuming
> it gets zihoed when it should). In this case there is a good Zipfean
> case for altering the place structure to exclude the oft-zihoed
> place from the definition.

This is what I wanted to say. :)

Jorge