From OneOfThree@gmx.net Sun Apr 25 03:03:40 2004
Return-Path: <OneOfThree@gmx.net>
X-Sender: OneOfThree@gmx.net
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 82370 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2004 10:03:39 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
  by m20.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 25 Apr 2004 10:03:39 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.gmx.net) (213.165.64.20)
  by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 25 Apr 2004 10:03:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 27903 invoked by uid 65534); 25 Apr 2004 10:03:37 -0000
Received: from p5086D7A2.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (HELO ONEOF) (80.134.215.162)
  by mail.gmx.net (mp007) with SMTP; 25 Apr 2004 12:03:37 +0200
X-Authenticated: #3159272
Message-ID: <001f01c42aa4$704e4f80$fe7aa8c0@ONEOF>
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1082816537.133.83659.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 11:03:45 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 213.165.64.20
From: "Stefan \"1of3\" Koch" <OneOfThree@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: traji
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=39088451
X-Yahoo-Profile: oneofthree2
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 22050

Jorge "Llambías" <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
> I entered this definition for {traji} in jbovlaste:
>
> x1 zmadu fa'u mleca ro cmima be x4 be'o poi na du x1
> ku'o x2 do'e x3 noi ka zmadu fa'u mleca

> I have two questions, one technical and one political.
>
> The technical question: Is the definition (mainly the
> use of fa'u and do'e) understandable?

I understand the "do'e" phrase but it is not very elegant. Why don't you use
some "fi'o"?

> The political question: Do we really want to conflate
> "most" and "least" into the same word, especially given
> that in actual use and in all compounds it is always
> "most"? Is there any advantage at all in having
> {traji be fi lo ka zmadu} and {traji be fi lo ka mleca}
> instead of {traji} and {tolrai}?

I don't really like way it is done. First of all in a way we have a brivla
that can do so: "moi" ("pamoi" and "romoi" in this case).

"moi" can even express all the values inbetween.

So if we need "traji" at all (I'd say yes because it is useful for
compounds) limit it to "most".


mu'omi'e ctefan.