From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Thu Sep 06 17:56:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_1); 7 Sep 2001 00:56:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 1353 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 00:49:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Sep 2001 00:49:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta07-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.47) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Sep 2001 00:49:39 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.253.88.88]) by mta07-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010907004937.NZAM710.mta07-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for ; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 01:49:37 +0100 Reply-To: To: Subject: RE: [lojban] Another stab at a Record on ce'u Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 01:48:54 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" John: > And Rosta scripsit: > > > or, in an intriguing novel (but probably bad) usage I haven't > > considered before: > > > > xu ro ka ce'u -daterape ce'u ka ce'u -rape ce'u > > xu ro si'o -daterape kei si'o -rape > > I think that no concept of date rape is a concept of rape -- they > are distinct concepts. Rather, every *event* of date rape is an > event of rape: ro nu -daterape kei nu -rape. Certainly life will be simpler if we agree with you (because what you say is sane, I mean). --And.