Return-Path: <@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi  with smtp
	(Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0stgxy-0000ZLC; Fri, 15 Sep 95 23:02 EET DST
Received: from fiport.funet.fi (fiport.funet.fi [128.214.109.150]) by kantti.helsinki.fi (8.6.12+Emil1.1/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA23070 for <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>; Fri, 15 Sep 1995 23:02:29 +0300
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (MAILER@CUNYVMV2)
 by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V5.0-3 #2494) id <01HVBLY7M45C000DYJ@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>
 for veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI; Fri, 15 Sep 1995 23:03:20 +0200 (EET)
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@CUNYVM)
 by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7200; Fri,
 15 Sep 1995 16:01:41 -0400
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 1995 16:00:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Subject: Re: jvajvo query
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Reply-to: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Message-id: <01HVBLY9R23U000DYJ@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 729
Lines: 30

And:
> QUESTION ONE
> Can anyone recall the jvajvo recommendations for, say,
> {koa troci/djica lo (dahi) nu koa te dunda koe}?
 
Whose recommendations? I can give you mine... :)
 
> Should it be
> {koa troci zei te zei dunda koe} or {koa te zei dunda zei
> troci koe}?
 
I prefer {terdudytoi} to {tocterdu'a}.
 
> The natural language pattern is generally the
> latter (at least according to current theory).
 
That's good.
 
The place structure of {terdudytoi} according to me would be:
 
x1 tries to receive x2 from x3 by doing x4
 
> QUESTION TWO
> How does one distinguish (tahi loe jvajvo) between
> [[te zei broda] zei brode] versus [te zei [broda zei brode]]?
 
The latter could be: te zei ke zei broda zei brode
 
Jorge