Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 30 May 2003 15:45:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu ([18.7.21.83]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19LsdH-0000nO-00 for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Fri, 30 May 2003 15:45:55 -0700 Received: from central-city-carrier-station.mit.edu (CENTRAL-CITY-CARRIER-STATION.MIT.EDU [18.7.7.72]) by pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h4UMjs1c018729 for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 18:45:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (MELBOURNE-CITY-STREET.MIT.EDU [18.7.21.86]) by central-city-carrier-station.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h4UMjrTR016468 for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 18:45:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from torg.mit.edu (TORG.MIT.EDU [18.243.1.228]) ) by melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h4UMjrU8000506 for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 18:45:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rob by torg.mit.edu with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19Lsd9-0001k8-00 for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 18:45:47 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 18:45:41 -0400 From: Rob Speer To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: feathered serpent Message-ID: <20030530224541.GA6695@mit.edu> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org References: <20030530145146.Y11161-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> <20030530145146.Y11161-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> <5.2.0.9.0.20030530182227.0339f250@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030530182227.0339f250@pop.east.cox.net> X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i X-archive-position: 358 X-Approved-By: rspeer@MIT.EDU X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: rspeer@MIT.EDU Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 389 On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 06:26:58PM -0400, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > Not necessarily. They should represent some canonical meaning which the > user thinks of a being a unitary concept of the sort s/he wants to > represent by a single word. But there should be some reason for it to be a single word - not just the fact that "feathered" is one word in English. -- mu'o mi'e rab.spir