From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Jul 03 11:26:39 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 3 Jul 2002 18:26:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 68958 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2002 18:26:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jul 2002 18:26:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jul 2002 18:26:39 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17Popr-0002LP-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 03 Jul 2002 11:26:39 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17Popp-0002L8-00; Wed, 03 Jul 2002 11:26:38 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 03 Jul 2002 11:26:35 z (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17Popm-0002Kz-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 03 Jul 2002 11:26:34 -0700 Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 11:26:34 -0700 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: Re: [lojban] pro-sumti question Message-ID: <20020703182634.GT2538@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20020702202324.A65525@allusion.net> <0207031322060D.02128@neofelis> <20020703172941.GR2538@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <0207031424320F.02128@neofelis> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0207031424320F.02128@neofelis> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 99 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Robin Lee Powell Reply-To: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=66827819 X-Yahoo-Profile: robinleepowell On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 02:24:32PM -0400, Pierre Abbat wrote: > On Wednesday 03 July 2002 13:29, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > What's wrong with "la'e di'u"? > > That normally refers to at least a bridi, so it would be understood as > "The dog chased the cat and the chasing got tired". It can't be taken > to mean "the dog and the cat" unless the first bridi is rearranged. After discussing it on IRC, I am now firmly of the opinion that unbound ko'a is best in this case. Maybe "ko'a poi remei" if you want to clarify. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno je xlali -- RLP http://www.lojban.org/