Received: from spooler by stryx.demon.co.uk (Mercury/32 v2.01); 29 Oct 98 23:14:10 +0000 Return-path: Received: from punt-21.mail.demon.net (194.217.242.6) by stryx.demon.co.uk (Mercury/32 v2.01); 29 Oct 98 23:14:05 +0000 Received: from punt-2.mail.demon.net by mailstore for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk id 909702514:20:18750:2; Thu, 29 Oct 98 23:08:34 GMT Received: from listserv.cuny.edu ([128.228.100.10]) by punt-2.mail.demon.net id aa2122651; 29 Oct 98 23:08 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.cuny.edu) by listserv.cuny.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <1.FE9FBC11@listserv.cuny.edu>; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:10:35 -0500 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 19:38:50 -0300 Reply-To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" Sender: Lojban list From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" Subject: Re: Lojban dictionary program? X-To: lojban To: Multiple recipients of list LOJBAN Message-ID: <909702514.2122651.0@listserv.cuny.edu> X-PMFLAGS: 33554560 7 1 Y060C0.CNM Content-Length: 1107 Lines: 29 la robin cusku di'e >mi gleki le nu la florent. cu tcidu le se ciska pe mi i mi ji'a gleki i a'o so'ida tcidu le se ciska be so'ide bau la lojban >.u'u.u'i lo vlacku na vasru le piso'i mi valsi goi ko'a ki'u ko'a na >ge'adra i le vlacku na'e vasru piso'e lei mi valsi ki'u le nu le vlacku cu se finti pu le nu mi co'a ciska >[Questions: can you use 'vasru' for books, and can "na ge'adra" be used >for a malformed lujvo?] Yes and yes, in my opinion. But be careful with the use of {na}. It often doesn't negate what you want to negate. In this case, you are not saying that the words are not contained. Maybe {na} will end up having shorter scope than the whole bridi though, because everybody uses it as English "not". co'o mi'e xorxes