[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Fwd: [lojban-beginners] xorlo, lo'e, and le'e
- To: lojban-list@lojban.org
- Subject: Re: [lojban] Fwd: [lojban-beginners] xorlo, lo'e, and le'e
- From: Joshua Choi <joshua@choi.name>
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:29:50 -0700
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=PSxM9MhsrQVemBC6UwomktHU4QS4y3kwpjT/ayrpDVU=; b=T/h1TLAGByIcni5MyBjsW/oeHCmuNlYSP/2eiRSQFBIgElN6Z6ghBujBXaiO34RkAe NaUdVvWci0rR3THhg8smxBhcukAKQYLicl8wYf3JGl74EV3q6wKiIYiOm/qKggSXEyCu 2umhQ4wq+2Li9pUiB/X45bfKlGmnnOwi21JFk=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=wcVkHjzGPXVGqz5H0QDqdOj6tyyjOf312TtPZFWJr6X78n3Q8ZSNcsJC4MD5tJ1M8P LEuEtYOBaFvym4vnFtZYFKAFYUteJHzKFcAemGyR1hu7g0BQ/i1aznN32D/17TKmo2XE oXsl7e3f8AIve48N0JZejZzyJmJXGLwwitAWQ=
- In-reply-to: <e810bafd0912141723u51c58083n4b2e737e885b4c3b@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <429fde40912141716h2ebb6d8cy928a4cc2eed97235@mail.gmail.com> <e810bafd0912141723u51c58083n4b2e737e885b4c3b@mail.gmail.com>
- Sender: rbysamppi@gmail.com
Ah, does it? I'm a beginner at Lojban, and I've been making xorlo part
of my learning of the language, since it seems that it's basically
standard now. Is this an unresolved or advanced question or something?
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 6:23 PM, james riley <jimr1603@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think this belongs on the main list, not the beginers list.
>
> cmacis
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Joshua Choi <joshua@choi.name>
> Date: 2009/12/15
> Subject: [lojban-beginners] xorlo, lo'e, and le'e
> To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
>
>
> I tried searching the mailing lists to see if it was answered, but
> while I found the same question asked by Squark Rabinovich earlier
> this year, I didn't find an answer for it:
>
> Under the xorlo reform, the articles in the LA and LE selma'o are
> reformed. However, two articles in LE are not mentioned at all in
> either the informal or formal proposals of xorlo: lo'e and le'e. What
> is the status of these cmavo after xorlo? Are they deprecated? Or are
> they included in xorlo? Or are they unchanged?
>
>
>
>
>