Return-Path: Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rJOdc-00007DC; Sun, 18 Dec 94 18:39 EET Received: from fiport.funet.fi (fiport.funet.fi [128.214.109.150]) by kantti.helsinki.fi (8.6.9/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA12488 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 18:39:09 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (MAILER@SEARN) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-7 #2494) id <01HKSNJ6XUCG000ALV@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 16:38:13 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1567; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 17:35:58 +0100 Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 16:36:32 +0000 From: ucleaar Subject: Re: fractionators In-reply-to: (Your message of Sat, 17 Dec 94 14:09:32 EST.) Sender: Lojban list Reply-to: ucleaar Message-id: <01HKSNJ6YV2Q000ALV@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 414 Lines: 15 Jorge: > > At any rate, I think "lei" should behave exactly like "le pa", and > > "loi" exactly like "lo pa". > > I agree wholeheartedly. > > (I take it you are talking about their behaviour vis-a-vis fractionators, > not that {lei broda} should mean {le pa broda}. This is obvious, but just > in case your sentence is too out of context.) That's right: behaviour vis-a-vis fractionators is what I meant. -- And