From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Nov 07 06:20:50 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 07 Nov 2008 06:20:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KySCg-0000Bx-G1 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 06:20:50 -0800 Received: from sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no ([129.241.210.67]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KySCc-0000BM-L3 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 06:20:50 -0800 Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no [129.241.210.68]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 474A894791 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:20:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (8.13.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id mA7EKTbh004750 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:20:29 +0100 Received: (from arj@localhost) by hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (8.13.8/8.13.1/Submit) id mA7EKTgG004749 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:20:29 +0100 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:20:28 +0100 From: Arnt Richard Johansen To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: la'e di'u (was: experimental cmavo in lojgloss.) Message-ID: <20081107142028.GC2447@nvg.org> References: <737b61f30811070541l45110d3dsc5144714e926e32d@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560811070554m1b3a060ds5904bb7451ce7920@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NVG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-NVG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: arj@nvg.ntnu.no X-Spam-Score: -0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 14952 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arj@nvg.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 03:08:59PM +0100, Daniel Brockman wrote: > > "tei" and "tau" are what I would have > > liked for "la'e di'u" and "la'e de'u", or something like that. > > Interesting. Those are some wasted quality short cmavo. > > I keep thinking we should deprecate all those short cmavo that > nobody uses as soon as possible, so we can start using them > for something else eventually. I was going to refer you to http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Cmavo+that+are+a+ghastly+waste+of+precious+monosyllabic+cmavo+space, but now I see that you've left your mark there already. Anyway, reassignment of extant cmavo is not likely to happen, for reasons of forwards-compatibility. -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ Never put off till tomorrow what you can do the day after tomorrow. 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.