From sentto-44114-17358-1038787516-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Dec 01 16:05:58 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:05:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from n19.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.74]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18Ie5v-0000PI-01 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:05:52 -0800 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-17358-1038787516-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.66.94] by n19.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Dec 2002 00:05:21 -0000 X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 2 Dec 2002 00:05:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 33628 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 00:05:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2002 00:05:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.40) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 00:05:15 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 16:05:15 -0800 Received: from 200.69.2.52 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 00:05:15 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Dec 2002 00:05:15.0770 (UTC) FILETIME=[7DFD6DA0:01C29996] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.69.2.52] X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 00:05:15 +0000 Subject: [lojban] Re: Why we should cancel the vote or all vote NO (was RE: Official Statement- LLG Board approves new baseline policy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 2844 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list la djorden cusku di'e > > Whereas "la'edi'u" was a common phrase from the earliest versions of > > Lojban, and no one ever suggested that it deserved a shorter form. Nor >do > > I want one now. > >Actually I believe And has in fact proposed a two syllable cmavo to >mean "la'edi'u". I have no idea why that would be useful. I have very often wished for a short form for {la'e di'u}. In fact that is the example I usually give for what {lau} might have been. Perhaps you don't feel the need because you often use {ti} with that meaning, so you already have it as a one-syllable cmavo. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/