From pycyn@aol.com Thu Jul 04 17:03:05 2002
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 5 Jul 2002 00:03:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 75680 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2002 00:03:03 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
  by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Jul 2002 00:03:03 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m06.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.161)
  by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Jul 2002 00:03:03 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com
  by imo-m06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.21.) id r.1e.2a9a75d7 (4405)
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 20:02:55 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <1e.2a9a75d7.2a563c2f@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 20:02:55 EDT
Subject: Re: [lojban] pro-sumti question
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1e.2a9a75d7.2a563c2f_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509
From: pycyn@aol.com
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001
X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra

--part1_1e.2a9a75d7.2a563c2f_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 7/4/2002 5:08:35 PM Central Daylight Time, 
lojban-out@lojban.org writes:


> IIRC, ri, ra and ru skip sumti of: ri ra ru ko'[aeiou] mi do ti ta tu ...
> Additionally, "ra" != "rixire". ra just refers to a further-than-last
> sumti, not the next to last.

This sounds right, once said, so I withdraw my hope that {ri/a/u} is 
unambiguous, but hope this avoids the kind of doubling up that Nora 
suggested.


--part1_1e.2a9a75d7.2a563c2f_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2>In a message dated 7/4/2002 5:08:35 PM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">IIRC, ri, ra and ru skip sumti of: ri ra ru ko'[aeiou] mi do ti ta tu ...<BR>
Additionally, "ra" != "rixire".&nbsp; ra just refers to a further-than-last<BR>
sumti, not the next to last.</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
This sounds right, once said, so I withdraw my hope that {ri/a/u} is unambiguous, but hope this avoids the kind of doubling up that Nora suggested.<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_1e.2a9a75d7.2a563c2f_boundary--

