Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 06 Sep 2005 05:58:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1ECd2C-0007Ub-Nc for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 05:58:44 -0700 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.198]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1ECd2A-0007UU-Vq for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 05:58:44 -0700 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 13so790959nzp for ; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 05:58:41 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=TiO7jikn6+NGOhqXKYX6mK8N9LRVuDW1zMEi5Q6wagpWGzSH3B7Rc5G1qcQn8TYtbnm4f1Mpr8hzoZ7N3e2fXvPg3CgJoiu40LwNFk1fLVuee91+LMNSw6q6cOS76kY0HjnmTQiGlW2YuC2Oq3l24VMOJVipI4V3Df317fljW3I= Received: by 10.37.12.25 with SMTP id p25mr5663329nzi; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 05:58:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.222.64 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Sep 2005 05:58:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2d3df92a0509060558608f194c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 14:58:41 +0200 From: HeliodoR To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Another Newbie Intro In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_10969_10732554.1126011521395" References: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-archive-position: 1980 X-Approved-By: exitconsole@gmail.com 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: exitconsole@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 3251 ------=_Part_10969_10732554.1126011521395 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline la filip. ciska di'e > I would've left out {la} after COI and would've said {coi .nei,omis. .e= =20 rodo > .i mi'e .skat.}, but leaving in the {la} is not wrong. I'm not sure about it, but I suppose that they don't really mean the same= =20 (with and without the {la}). For example, to me {coi .skat.} seems like "Goodbye to YOU, Scott!", while {coi la skat.} is more like "Goodbye to the person who's called Scott!",=20 less personally. > co'o mi'e .skat. > or > co'o mi'e la skat. And IMO those ones are also different: "Bye, [I'm] Scott." "Bye, [I'm] the person who's called Scott." o_0 > As for me, I tend to use {mu'o} in email exchanges since I'm not parting= =20 or > saying good-bye, as such; rather, I expect people to respond to my messag= e > and so I say the equivalent of "I'm finished talking now; you can respond > now if you wish". Personal preference, I suppose. Everybody is trying to make up her/his own Lojban-style, and the language= =20 offers quite a lot of possibilities to do that. .u'i (Personally - I like Your {mu'o}... but I don't like stealing ideas.) (Just a note about 'Indicators vs. Emoticons': I've been using some=20 attidutinals so far although I do feel that the message becomes a bit less lively without the= =20 usual smileys. .uinai) mi'e .xili,odor. ------=_Part_10969_10732554.1126011521395 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
la filip. ciska di'e
> I would've left out {la} after COI and wo= uld've said {coi .nei,omis. .e rodo
> .i mi'e .skat.}, but leaving in= the {la} is not wrong.
I'm not sure about it, but I suppose that they d= on't really mean the same (with and
without the {la}).
For example, to me {coi .skat.} seems like "Goodbye to = YOU, Scott!", while
{coi la skat.} is more like "Goodbye to the person who's called S= cott!", less personally.

> co'o mi'e .skat.
> or
> co'o mi'e la skat.
And= IMO those ones are also different:
"Bye, [I'm] Scott."
"Bye, [I'm] the person who's called Scott." o_0

> As for me, I tend to use {mu'o} in email exchanges since I'm = not parting or
> saying good-bye, as such; rather, I expect people to= respond to my message
> and so I say the equivalent of "I'm fin= ished talking now; you can respond
> now if you wish". Personal preference, I suppose.
Everybod= y is trying to make up her/his own Lojban-style, and the language offers
quite a lot of possibilities to do that. .u'i
(Personally - I like Your {mu'o}... but I don't like stealin= g ideas.)
 
(Just a note about 'Indicators vs. Emoticons': I've been using some at= tidutinals so far
although I do feel that the message becomes a bit less livel= y without the usual smileys. .uinai)

mi'e .xili,odor.
------=_Part_10969_10732554.1126011521395--