From lojban+bncCNf8pM-bDBDlqf7gBBoEELDiVA@googlegroups.com Mon Jun 21 09:36:07 2010 Received: from mail-px0-f189.google.com ([209.85.212.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OQjyb-0004a4-V4; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 09:36:07 -0700 Received: by pxi18 with SMTP id 18sf2127653pxi.16 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 09:35:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received :sender:received:date:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=YUlaQxs21kz2vTLq9KOK/N9CBk4VV1DsrguvrKHuu2w=; b=4vzw6+8kJFEALGpOYBaB7Ki7FrTirrq/+iisc+wCau+dKLEPr+22cJAysqwMFJeDW7 B3m4xIZa9L1EB9k9vHI5YKA5kYFLWO6l+smvDlyXtatT+XygRMlIdVaR5jVFafe3/9PA xv1OQnDvgc+zvdN5trnaSlpYJq6RxutsthUvk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:date:message-id :subject:from:to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=RrcFnGL6/VJhc5uwsSFUitv62JBS6CGlyo//Rr8qxYkOtYjLQwPyga4WPyU58wtpIA V+gIObXsRYg0fxR4RS82IaE3nJxT80X2JHxvA4Txs5B9lvlzR3fTkzupoSiqOCZ2Wzni W2u7xPmm+l0kuRI7pENSgm0qhPQYPp2ytKoJA= Received: by 10.142.210.15 with SMTP id i15mr28043wfg.7.1277138149923; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 09:35:49 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.8.28 with SMTP id 28ls2645254wfh.0.p; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 09:35:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.60.18 with SMTP id i18mr469053wfa.23.1277138149132; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 09:35:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.89.132 with SMTP id c4mr20656wef.9.1277128827455; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 07:00:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.89.132 with SMTP id c4mr20655wef.9.1277128827414; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 07:00:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f170.google.com (mail-wy0-f170.google.com [74.125.82.170]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id d35si13674297wbd.2.2010.06.21.07.00.26; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 07:00:26 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.170; Received: by mail-wy0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 22so2757975wyf.15 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 07:00:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.173.8 with SMTP id u8mr253263wel.74.1277128826104; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 07:00:26 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.89.138 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 07:00:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 15:00:25 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] jegi From: tijlan To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: paskios@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=paskios@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016367fb011032fa104898aba45 --0016367fb011032fa104898aba45 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Apr 18, 2:20 am, Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote: > On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 8:57 PM, John E Clifford wrote: > > 21 (iirc) versions of 'e' all amounting to logical "and". Arose because the use of one such ('ga... gi') was incorrect and another ('gu'a ... gu'i') was required to do the same work. The others are a nice point as well, of course, though with a different motivation. > > Yes, I realized after I had already posted that you must have meant ge/gu'e. > > The situation is not as bad as 21 though, there's just the two > forethought ge/gu'e and three afterthought .e/je/gi'e, so five in all. > > "gu'e" should just be deprecated, and for all intents and purposes de > facto it is, since practically nobody ever uses it. > > "je" should be extended to cover the function of ".e", thus making > ".e" redundant. JOI already does both functions, so there's no > syntactic impediment there. > > "gi'e" can be replaced with "gije". > > That would leave just "ge" for forethought, and "je" for afterthought. Couldn't we also replace "ge" with "jegi"? --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den. --0016367fb011032fa104898aba45 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Apr 18, 2:20 am, Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllamb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 8= :57 PM, John E Clifford <kali9pu= ...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 21 (iirc) versions of 'e' all amounting to logical "= and". Arose because the use of one such=A0 ('ga... gi') was in= correct and another ('gu'a ... gu'i') was required to do th= e same work.=A0 The others are a nice point as well, of course, though with= a different motivation.
>
> Yes, I realized after I had already posted that you must have= meant ge/gu'e.
>
> The situation is not as bad as 21 thou= gh, there's just the two
> forethought ge/gu'e and three afte= rthought .e/je/gi'e, so five in all.
>
> "gu'e" should just be deprecated, and for all i= ntents and purposes de
> facto it is, since practically nobody ever u= ses it.
>
> "je" should be extended to cover the fun= ction of ".e", thus making
> ".e" redundant. JOI already does both functions, so there= 9;s no
> syntactic impediment there.
>
> "gi'e&= quot; can be replaced with "gije".
>
> That would le= ave just "ge" for forethought, and "je" for afterthough= t.

Couldn't we also replace "ge" with "jegi"?
<= br>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--0016367fb011032fa104898aba45--