Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:59:28 -0800
To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Lojban is not Vulcan or Borg
Message-ID: <20050321195928.GT29806@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
References: <200503182133.j2ILXvTd017432@mole.e-mol.com> <20050318214702.GR26000@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <423B563B.1050907@gulik.co.nz> <537d06d00503192224569e90fb@mail.gmail.com> <423E562B.7070505@gulik.co.nz> <20050321073703.GO29806@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <537d06d00503210230313ae52e@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <537d06d00503210230313ae52e@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Content-Length: 863

On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 11:30:37AM +0100, Philip Newton wrote:
> ni'o mi nelcu'a zo gi'uste mu'i lo du'u lo te morna be fi zo
> gi'uste cu smimau lo te morna be fi zo ma'oste lo te morna be fi
> zo gimste
> 
> ...which is probably bad Lojban, too, and I wasn't sure which word
> was appropriate.
> 
> What I was trying to say is that I use {ma'oste} for the cmavo
> list and {gi'uste} for the gismu list... even though {gimste} is
> the canonical form for the lujvo, I prefer {gi'uste} because its
> shape/form is more closely parallel to that of {ma'oste} (which
> has no alternative with a CVC initial rafsi).

I had no problems understanding that at all.

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"
Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/