From lojbab Wed Aug 17 07:57:14 1994
Received: from access1.digex.net by nfs1.digex.net with SMTP id AA26292
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <lojbab@nfs1.digex.net>); Wed, 17 Aug 1994 07:57:12 -0400
Received: by access1.digex.net id AA23480
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for lojbab); Wed, 17 Aug 1994 07:57:10 -0400
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 1994 07:57:10 -0400
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab>
Message-Id: <199408171157.AA23480@access1.digex.net>
To: nsn@vis.mu.oz.au
Subject: Re: xruti
Cc: lojbab@access.digex.net
Status: RO

I would presume that if "jai" were to get a rafsi, or be changed to get a
rafsi, it would be a front-ender like "sel" rather than a back-ender like
"gau".  Is this correct?  


I do not see increasing reliance on jai to solve problems to be useful if we
cannot make the results into lujvo.

If you need a special secion in your paper on "xruti", then this increases
the pressure for either a rafsi change or a convention wrt -gau and -zu'e
(and , oh, -mlu???, though I suspect the raising there hasn't surfaced much).

We need to decide quickly if I am to be uinvolved in the decision.  I will
be off-net from FRiday until the 29th.

I certainly expect your lujvo list to be put up.  I figure that it should
go up at the same time as a new gismu list and my E-order list if possible,
but since the latter is at 75% still, I can pass on that.  But I want xruti
and if appropriate, any issues regading "jai" in lujvo to be resolved before
we put the files up.

lojbab