From Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Sun Dec 03 14:25:03 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 22:25:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 73850 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 22:24:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 22:24:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.46) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 23:25:49 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Received: from [10.1.10.99] by fj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 03 Dec 2000 22:24:43 -0000 Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 22:24:36 -0000 To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: le brajatna Message-ID: <90eh74+f1m5@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 589 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 193.149.49.79 From: "=?iso-8859-1?q?Alfred_W._Tueting_(T=FCting)?=" X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 4964 --- In lojban@egroups.com, "Jorge Llambias" wrote: > {cu catlu}, and then {zi zimlu} is not grammatical. > I suggest {ze'u pa snidu} = "for the very long time interval > of one second". Wouldn't {ze'u lo snidu} do as well? or just {ze'u snidu} > >lu ze'eba nu mi cadzu mo'i zo'a do kai ba mi > >djica lo bilrinsa .e na'e le tcima srenoi li'u] > > lu ze'ebaku ca le nu mi cadzu mo'i zo'a do kei mi > djica lo bilrinsa .enai le tcima srenoi li'u Do we really need lujvo like {srenoi}? stidi lu loi/lei srera notci be le tcima li'u co'o mi'e la .aulun.