From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Mon Sep 30 12:45:16 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 30 Sep 2002 19:45:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 21622 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2002 19:45:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Sep 2002 19:45:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailbox-5.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.105) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Sep 2002 19:45:15 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-71-149.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.71.149]) by mailbox-5.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C54614E5E for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 21:45:12 +0200 (DST) To: Subject: RE: [lojban] LOI PRENU GO PA MEI GI KA'E NAI TE JINGA? Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 20:46:50 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 16259 Jorge: > la and cusku di'e > > >How about {loi prenu go pa mei gi ka'e nai te jinga} > >that sounds pretty coolass to me -- something John might consent to chant. > > Yes, but {lei prenu} rather than {loi prenu}. Any individual > person, any pair, any threesome, can instantiate {loi prenu}. > That says "Some people, united, can never be defeated", not > what we mean. What about {ro pregri}? I don't quite want to say "a certain mass of people", either. Well, it's not wrong, I guess. > {ka'enai} is not grammatical officially, but it has wide usage > support. John's {ginai ka'e} alternative is good too. requires stress as: gi NAI ka'E te JINga -- so I'm not sure if that'd work. > The causal relationship has to be groked from context, I suppose. More than in the original? --And.