From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Wed Jul 23 07:59:11 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 29771 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2003 14:59:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 23 Jul 2003 14:59:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Jul 2003 14:59:10 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19fL5C-0004o9-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 07:59:10 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19fL4n-0004mr-00; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 07:58:45 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 23 Jul 2003 07:58:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web41901.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.152]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19fL4M-0004lA-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 07:58:18 -0700 Message-ID: <20030723145748.80400.qmail@web41901.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.49.74.2] by web41901.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 07:57:48 PDT Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 07:57:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [lojban] Re: le du To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <20030723103038.G33722-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 5964 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 X-list: lojban-list From: Jorge "Llambías" Reply-To: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=142311107 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 20446 la xod cusku di'e > I haven't yet seen a good reason to use le du. There is no reason not to use it. It has a clear meaning determined by the meanings of {le} and {du}. You don't have to use it if you don't want to, there usually are alternatives, but it is well defined. It is a matter of style which alternative you prefer. {du} is the emptiest possible description you can get, as it applies to everything. {le du} is equivalent to {le su'o da}. mu'o mi'e xorxes __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com