From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sun Apr 02 23:37:06 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 02 Apr 2006 23:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FQIgB-0003T9-LM for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 02 Apr 2006 23:36:47 -0700 Received: from [166.82.175.165] (helo=blackcat.ixazon.lan) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FQIg8-0003T1-2L for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 02 Apr 2006 23:36:47 -0700 Received: by blackcat.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BB1821B09; Mon, 3 Apr 2006 06:37:19 +0000 (UTC) From: Pierre Abbat To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Place structure of {fu'ivla} Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 01:37:06 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200604030237.12321.phma@phma.optus.nu> X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 11291 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: phma@phma.optus.nu Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list I'm looking at the definition in jbovlaste of {fu'ivla} and x4 is unclear (which is typical of definitions entered by noralujv). Is it the language the word came from, or the form of the word in that language? Which of these is correct?: .i zo skomberu fu'ivla lu finpe da li'u lo lojbo zoi ly. Scomber .ly .i zo skomberu fu'ivla lu finpe da li'u lo lojbo lo latmo Or should they both be included?: .i zo skomberu fu'ivla lu finpe da li'u lo lojbo zoi ly. Scomber .ly lo latmo (I am ignoring how one would actually write a Lojban definition of {skomberu}.) phma To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.