From @uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Fri May 26 21:59:29 1995 Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3121 ; Fri, 26 May 95 21:59:28 BST Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Fri, 26 May 95 14:09:24 GMT Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by punt2.demon.co.uk id aa21343; 26 May 95 15:08 +0100 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0231; Fri, 26 May 95 10:07:00 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1752; Fri, 26 May 1995 09:59:36 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 09:57:53 -0400 Reply-To: John Cowan Sender: Lojban list From: John Cowan Subject: jei vs. ni X-To: Lojban List To: Iain Alexander In-Reply-To: <199505260455.AAA16076@locke.ccil.org> from "ucleaar" at May 26, 95 01:24:09 am Message-ID: <9505261509.aa21343@punt2.demon.co.uk> Status: R la .and. cusku di'e > I wonder whether {lo jei carmi gusni} is different from {lo ni carmi gusni}. > Perhaps there is an upper limit on {lo jei c g} (e.g. a value of 1), > but no upper limit on {lo ni carmi gusni} (allowing for infinite brightness). > What do you reckon? Sounds good to me, but I don't claim to fully understand "ni". -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.