2012/11/17 la gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com>:
> There was a thread on {xa'e} sev. months ago (actually I started it) with
> someone replying that {.e'i} is the solution.
>
I don't think {.e'i} implies {.e'a}. I need a broader term than the
attitudinals {au}, {a'o}, {e'o}, {e'u}, {e'a} and {ei}.