From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Mon May 26 07:13:17 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 15686 invoked from network); 26 May 2003 14:13:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 May 2003 14:13:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n27.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.83) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 May 2003 14:13:16 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.169] by n27.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 May 2003 14:13:15 -0000 Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 14:13:14 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: emotions Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030525232930.030d4260@pop.east.cox.net> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 723 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "jjllambias2000" X-Originating-IP: 200.49.74.2 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=142311107 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 19885 la lojbab cusku di'e > >In any case, the best way to oppose these words is to provide > >good canonical alternatives, as Nick said. > > Nora suggested that no noncanonical word should be allowed to be added to > the jbovlaste UNLESS a canonical (perhaps longer) alternative has already > been added. That seems to put the onus on the wrong party. If I wanted {parji} to be adopted then I'd be tempted to enter an unappealing canonical alternative so that it won't really compete with my proposal. Adding {brodr-} to a gismu form will always result in a valid fu'ivla. So an automatic way of canonizing experimental gismu would be to prefix them with brodr-, as in {brodrparji}. mu'o mi'e xorxes