From zefram@fysh.org Fri May 14 09:49:35 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 14 May 2004 09:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [195.167.170.152] (helo=bowl.fysh.org ident=mail) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.32) id 1BOfsG-00073o-FI for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 14 May 2004 09:49:28 -0700 Received: from zefram by bowl.fysh.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BOfsB-0005sT-00; Fri, 14 May 2004 17:49:23 +0100 Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 17:49:23 +0100 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: y: what is it good for? Message-ID: <20040514164923.GA21946@fysh.org> References: <20040513183600.GJ4461@digitalkingdom.org> <20040514003615.GQ4461@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i From: Zefram X-archive-position: 7850 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: zefram@fysh.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Adam D. Lopresto wrote: >I almost wish ybu weren't, and were replaced with something like pensi bu, That would indeed relieve some of the pressure on "y", opening up some nice options. It's an appealing idea. But I think it's better to keep "ybu" valid, by making it a new type of cmavo if necessary. -zefram