Return-Path: <@SEGATE.SUNET.SE:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0sBEGu-0009acC; Tue, 16 May 95 07:30 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v0.1a) with SMTP id F82FEE9C ; Tue, 16 May 1995 6:30:15 +0100 Date: Tue, 16 May 1995 00:28:02 -0400 Reply-To: "Dylan P. Thurston" Sender: Lojban list From: "Dylan P. Thurston" Subject: Re: A modest proposal #2: verdicality X-To: Lojban list , jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <01HQJM6NTV76BHDO3Z@NETOP6.HARVARD.EDU> Content-Length: 850 Lines: 32 mi cusku di'e > > {ga'inai loi satcyselsku zo'u stidi} > > [The attitudinal paper mentions {galtu} w.r.t ga'i, which seems > > malglico. {tolbanli}, maybe?] la xorxes. cusku di'e > Many of the etymologies of UIs are malglico. The best thing > is to ignore them. .i.ie gi'o > .... > > But I don't see why +/-verdical distinction has to be there when it can > > just as easily be made with a cnima'o following the brivla. > > Do as I do and ignore it. :) .i.ie.u'i go'i > > If this has been discussed before, my apologies. > > Lots and lots of times, but we never end up agreeing so we can discuss > it again. .i.o'ucu'i.e'u ko joi mi'a sarxe binxo ki'u lo balvi ke jbobau cilre cu na'e se cfipu .i ta'o xu zo ko ka'e cmavo fi zo ma'a ji zo mi'o .i xu lo cnino cmavo cu sarcu gi'i se djica > co'o mi'e xorxes co'o mi'e. dilyn.