Re: [lojban] Re: Named multiples

[Daniel Brockman <daniel@brockman.se>]

> It pleases me when people find their Lindar-filters.
> ((I lol'd @ talking to me like I'm a simpleton. <3 ))

That wasn't meant as a comment about you so much as a comment about the
simplicity of the basic proposal, though.

> We can't come up with a different name? I'm pretty sure that, aside
> from brodV, we're not supposed to have gismu that are the same
> excepting the final vowel.

These are just names.  They're not gismu in the sense of "root words",
they're gismu only in the purely morphological sense.

> I have a very valid question for all involved:
>
> Will we be documenting definitions for cmevla now that they are valid
> brivla, or should it be left up to context?

You're being a little too forward with this ("now that they are valid brivla").
What we should do is just to continue experimenting and discussing.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.