Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rmVy8-00007ZC; Thu, 9 Mar 95 02:20 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4481; Thu, 09 Mar 95 02:21:01 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 4479; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 02:21:01 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6306; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 01:17:03 +0100 Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 14:45:09 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: Imaginary Journeys X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199503080600.AA03272@nfs2.digex.net> from "Glyn Gowing" at Mar 7, 95 08:49:33 pm Content-Length: 858 Lines: 27 la glyn. cusku di'e > I believe i _may_ have found an error or two in the Imaginary Journeys paper: > > p 15: > example 21.10 reads: la .artr. pu je'i ba nolraitru > > je'i is defined in my cmavo list as the /tanru/ afterthought question > connector. Maybe i'm missing something here, but wouldn't ji make > more sense here? No. The JA selma'o are used to connect tenses and a few other things as well as tanru. See the connectives paper at the FTP site. Note that "ji" belongs to selma'o A, for historical reasons. > Also, in the proposed replies: > > je is listed to indicate 'both' (makes sense) > > The next two, however, seem reversed: in the paper they read: > naje 'the former' and jenai 'the latter' Fixed. -- John Cowan sharing account for now e'osai ko sarji la lojban.