[no subject]

[nsn@ee.mu.oz.au]

I believe in eliminating "rafsi overkill". Not universally, not unquestion-
ingly; after all, when the choice is between CVC and CVV, there are good
reasons to go for CVC. But I do believe in rafsi space sparseness and a
reduction in multiple forms as a guiding principle.

2. I'd still like {banli} to keep {bal} ({ba'i} can stay or go. Otherwise OK.

Eaton:
>darno +flalu +bajra

Hilarious! :)

6. The usage made of {cmila} in lujvo still doesn't seem to me sufficient to
justify this change (understatement plus). I don't think {mi'i} initial is 
criminal for {minji} though. I'm making my vote a SHRUG.

7. It amuses me that *all* the kalsa lujvo are mine, though I've also seen
a lot of lujvo with {cunso} where {kalsa} would be much more appropriate.

8. SHRUG. Sack or knife... *shrug*

10-11 approved.

13 approved reluctantly (that is, I approve fin for frinu, rather than fi'u,
though I still much prefer my proposal; finti, I think, deserves both rafsi,
and I still like the cmavo link).

15 approved. The cisyjvo didn't look that outlandish to me! :)

19. Oh this is regrettable: I liked the smooth-hyphened {gar} for {gapru},
({garkla} has stuck in my head), and would rather we ditched having a rafsi
for garna than this. But I'm not putting my foot down.

20 OK.

>21.  
>NSN noted that the data for curnu is erroneous, being based on his errors.  

Not fair, nuncle; Colin Fine, at least, has made the same error in Andersen.

>However, if people feel it appropriate, cu'u can be given over to cuntu
>per change 76. which would then allow macnu to regain cnu as some have
>asked for.  

Absolutely. Do it.

I'll learn to live with 21... There are good (and sacredness-assaulting)
assignments in it.

22, 76.  Cool.

>24.  NSN took an interesting position on this one.  

It took me an hour to get from 24 to 150, Bob; cut me some slack :)

>Now I ask why fetsi MUST have a monosyllable CVV when nakni, even if na'i is
>retained, gets only a disyllable CV'V.  Methinks a double standard is
>being raised.  

Nice try :) Actually, it's so because {nai} for {natmi} is much less assailable
than {fei} for {fepni} --- though I've started wondering whether it isn't,
and whether in fact {natmi} shouldn't get {na'i}, and {nakni} --- {nai}.
Double standard or not, reversible or not, these rafsi *will* get heavy usage.

My mind has not been changed on this; now I'm thinking about switching {na'i}
and {nai}, I've turned even more intransigent on you :) After all, there's
no need to have Fepni first in a lujvo if it still keeps {fe'i}! *My* proposal
is: {na'i} to natmi, {nai} to {nakni}, {fe'i} to fepni, {fei} to fetsi, and
don't worry about nalci. (btw, I want the CVV for all-cases-covered hyphening,
not for suffixing; my Esperanto is not coming into play here; I intend to
use both nakni and fetsi as prefixes.

If noone else supports me on this one, then have it your way; but you haven't
convinced me.

27. sla for {salci} OK by me

32. I reluctantly approve of this one; it still seems disruptive to me (inter
alia, {sa'e} is somewhat sacred for me).

33. If at all possible, switch the rafsi for {tadji} and {tarmi}, not their
sumtcita; I've gotten *very* attached to {tai} for {tadji}. Otherwise, OK.

37. Thanks. this one made my week :) .i mi toldri toldri toldri lenu zo tol.
rafsi zo toldi vau.ui

43.  You omit the more recent malticta'axlu of the phone game. Still, let it
through.

47.  I'm making my vote a shrug. {rinju} may well deserve two rafsi' {rijno}
may well not deserve any.

48.  I still think {ger} looks odd with {gerku}, but I won't argue.
51.  This data still doesn't support a rafsi for tamji:
>2    jaftamji
taj is no help here
>2    jaftamjycalku
nor here --- and such compounds, with nonfinal tamji, are very rare.
>tamji +clani
Thumb-long? won't be missed
>tamji +ganra
This neither. There is no good reason I can see to give {tamji} {tau}.

52.  I'll learn to like this, but I still think this is a mistake. *shrug*
Make the change anyway, I can't really argue it convincingly.

55 looks alright.

59, 65.  OK

>68.  NSN is opposed, being suspicious of lujvo involving ladru.  Why?
>Have you never seen a dairy farm, eaten or drunk dairy products, etc.

Not lately; trying to cut down on my cholesterol :) I'll cope with it.

72.  Fine, don't change it.

81.  Good move.

84.  I still oppose. With very little lujvo-final use for either degji or
denci, and with {dei} so sacred and *handy*, I still do. See my review of
the data. I propose {dei} retutn from {degji} to {djedi}.

>The dinri problem has been solved - based on the ckamu, mleca precedent,

Allow me the indulgance of scowling at you for springing this on me.

*scowl*

Still, if it had to be done...

>Lojban data
>denci
>26   xantydenmai
Ivory
>1    dentro
Looks Greek to me
>2    badjafyde'i
jaftamji
>2    badjafyde'icalku
jaftamjycalku
>2    badyde'i
tamji
>4    degjai
no de'i
>1    degnuncinse
no de'i
>2    pavde'i
pavdei? (Sunday)
>djedi
>11   bavlamdei
djedi
>2    bendei
djedi
>30   cabdei
djedi/donri
>13   dedmidju
donri
>1    djesni
donri
>1    djetei
donri
>1    glejbedei
djedi
>1    glesalcydei
djedi
>3    midydei
donri
>2    midydeisa'i
donri
>8    nacykefydei
djedi
>1    pavnondei
djedi
>9    prulamdei
djedi (donri)
>11   purlamdei
djedi (donri)
>4    roldei
djedi (donri)
>10   saldei
djedi (donri)
>1    zandei
donri (djedi)

>Eaton data
(no degji or denci final)
>pa +djedi
God knows.
>re +purci +cabna +djedi
Que?
>djedi +krasi
Dawn? (donri)
>gleki +djedi
Good Morning?! (donri, I suppose)
>jbena +djedi
djedi
>morji +djedi
djedi, and why the hell is this here?
>djedi +liste
djedi
>djedi +xriso +re +moi +jbena
djedi (donri)
>djedi +morji +cukta
djedi
>ciste +djedi +nanca
...djedi? Non comprende

>TLI dict.
> xriso djedi
djedi
> midju djedi
donri
> lamji djedi
djedi (donri)
> ro    djedi
djedi 
> purci djedi
djedi (donri)
> jbena djedi
djedi
> djedi nicte (our djedi)
donri
> djedi sinxa
donri?
> balvi lamji djedi
djedi (donri)
> purci lamji djedi
djedi (donri)
> djedi sinxa ciska
djedi

85.  The reason we have not yet used {zarci} in any lujvo is bad keyword ---
it never occured to us that zarci is "shop"! For mundaneness, {zai} to zarci,
not {zasti}.

90. OK, though there's no final usage for either.
91.  Can't see why you're all getting so worked up about cabbage :) , and
if romge doesn't deserve 2 rafsi, neither does kobli. Otherwise OK
92. OK, I guess...
94. cusku has a rafsi cus?! wow, i never knew (this should tell you something.
Somethink like "overkill" :)

95. {di'o} to dinko, and {dig} may as well be deallocated; it doesn't seem to
be doing much good there.

97a. status quo (Great band, I hear :)

99.  Nah, not worth it. {ce} deserves {cel} (but not sixteen other rafsi :)
Likely to deserve it in the long run more than cecla. status quo.

>113.
>com *   *     0  0 com     co'e co'e  co'e        2   2   0   2   0   0 unspec
co'e will have final use. Give it {co'e}

>114.
>*   *   doi   0  0 don     doi  do    don         5   5   1   4   0   0 you
give it don; will be used word initial, so deserves smooth hyphening

>128.
>*   *   *     0  0 xem          xe    xem         0   0   0   0   0   0 5th co
It would be nice, you know, even if impossible, for this to be {xel} --- it's
used so little, and the analogy with {vel/sel} so pervasive, that {xem} is just
asking for trouble (and has found it, boosting {xel}'s score).

149.  Having dropped {bo'i}, return to to {botpi}, and let the not unsacred
{boi} return to bolci, bolstering status quo

158. Cool

159,161 Change my vote to a shrug: I'll go along with what Mark/John say.

>203.
>*   *   *     0  0 con cno coi  condi concnocoi  30  30   9  12   3   0 deep

The rationale doesn't impress me, but i won't argue, it's 2 am :)

>210.
>*   *   *     0  0 jaf jma      jamfu jafjma     53  44   8  22   8   9 foot
>not changed; mildly sacred by heavy usage, if not by anyone's particular
>memory - people regularly have chosen jaf over jma for some reason, even
>when it forced hyphenation.  


Simple reason: jma isn't memorable as the rafsi of jamfu; jaf is. Don't change
it: watching people misremember these rafsi will be fun :)

>211
this example of 3 rafsi business *really* doesn't convince me --- but it's 
still 2am :)

>216.
Nah, change it.

>219.
{zad} usage is negligible. {zma} usage is not recent. Kill {zad} as proposed.

>221.
Mmm. I'd keep {zil}; it's a nice hyphen.

Thank you, and good evening :)