Message-Id: <199412062339.AA08265@nfs2.digex.net> From: Jorge Llambias Date: Tue Dec 6 18:39:26 1994 Subject: Re: lo terspu be la Nik. .e la Xorxes .e la Goran Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Tue Dec 6 18:39:26 1994 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu And: > > > [What is "iseju"?] > > Sentence logical connector. It says that the second sentence > > is true whether or not the first one is. (seju is the reverse of ju.) > > Something like "in any case". > > I don't know how you could work that out from the cmavo list. Probably seju should be listed, like janai, jonai, etc. already are. > I hadn't realized moi wasn't an ordinal roi! Well, it isn't. That's why we need {re'u}. > > Also, {se ja te temci} is probably not what you meant. {seja} means the > > same as {ja}, because it is a symmetric connector. > > Would "seljavtertemci" make a difference? How does one conjoin members > of SE (surely something one might often wish to do)? Whyever would one wish to do that? You can always say {se temci ja te temci}, but I don't really see a need for a more compact form. The lujvo is probably understandable too. > XU do doi Nik. penmi le selnei gihe pendo vau be mi beho pohu lehi kosta > gehu ku la melbi borno tcadu ckule bantadni stura? la melbi borno ???? co'o mi'e xorxes (to noi ciska to'o la pitsi burgo toi)