[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Re: Military language

To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Military language
From: Seth Gordon <sethg@ropine.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:08:33 -0500
In-reply-to: <459BCE6B.8040603@perpetuum-immobile.de>
References: <000c01c72ee9$d72544b0$6601a8c0@hq.squarei.net> <459BC0B2.3090803@ropine.com> <459BCE6B.8040603@perpetuum-immobile.de>
User-agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20060926)

Timo Paulssen wrote:
> Seth Gordon wrote:
> 
>>Isn't there a standard to always use "NOT REPEAT NOT" in military
>>telegrams to make sure the reader doesn't skip over the word?
> 
> 
> another thought that just came to my mind is that lojban allows the
> vowels to be spoken as long as the user desires to, so maybe i'd just
> say "naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa" instead of "na" :)

Cf. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKX0RN19zc0

>

References:
- RE: [lojban] Military language
  - From: "M@" <matthew.dunlap@gmail.com>
- Re: [lojban] Re: Military language
  - From: Seth Gordon <sethg@ropine.com>
- Re: Military language
  - From: Timo Paulssen <timonator@perpetuum-immobile.de>

Prev by Date: Re: [lojban] Re: Military language
Next by Date: Re: [lojban] doi lokadin
Previous by thread: Re: Military language
Next by thread: mi nanmu ku'i
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread