From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Wed Apr 30 12:27:54 2003
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web20511.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.175.150])
	by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12)
	id 19AxF0-0003ru-00
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:27:42 -0700
Message-ID: <20030430192741.82960.qmail@web20511.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [200.49.74.2] by web20511.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:27:41 PDT
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jorge "Llambías" <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar>
Subject: [lojban] Re: Lujvo frequency list
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
In-Reply-To: <20030430164114.GT20953@digitalkingdom.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-archive-position: 5063
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list


la camgusmis cusku di'e

> > skudji (mean to say, from IRC) - 41
> 
> That's odd, since I for one consistently use djisku, on the grounds
> that the appropriate tanru is djica cusku, as in "xu do djica cusku
> lu mi na klama li'u".

{djica cusku} is closer to "willingly say". 

If {do pu djica cusku lu mi na klama li'u}, is it true that 
{do pu cusku lu mi na klama li'u}? Is {djica cusku} a type of {cusku}? 
Because usually {skudji} is used with something meant to be said but 
not actually said. It comes from {x1 djica le nu [da'i] x1 cusku x2},
it does not claim x1 cusku x2.

Of course, {djisku} need not claim {cusku} either, it's a new word,
but I would not call {djica cusku} the appropriate tanru.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com