From xod@thestonecutters.net Mon Aug 05 08:25:11 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 5 Aug 2002 15:25:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 16392 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2002 15:25:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Aug 2002 15:25:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Aug 2002 15:25:10 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17bjjK-0002Jx-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 05 Aug 2002 08:25:10 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17bjie-0002J7-00; Mon, 05 Aug 2002 08:24:28 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 05 Aug 2002 08:24:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.111.194.10] (helo=granite.thestonecutters.net) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17bjia-0002Iy-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2002 08:24:24 -0700 Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g75FOL489079 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2002 11:24:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 11:24:21 -0400 (EDT) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: Re: [lojban] LogFest Phone Game results In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020805112334.A88901-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 433 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Invent Yourself Reply-To: xod@thestonecutters.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Jorge Llambias wrote: > > la greg cusku di'e > > > > Creatures four-legged and two play along the river. > > > loi danlu noi remei najo vomei tuple ke'a ku'o cu kelci vu'u lo rirxe > > > >in my ma'oste, {vu'u} is "minus" along is {mo'ire'o}. How did the next > >participant have the faintest idea what was going on? (Apart from taking > >pot > >luck among the two or three *likely* possibilities?). > > Maybe {bu'u} was meant? Would {te'e} be best? In any case, > {mo'ire'o} is not this "along". I can't think of any good > example where {mo'ire'o} would make sense. {mo'i} in general > is not very useful, as it refers to a general movement of the > whole event and not the movement of one of the sumti, which is > what we usually want. Whoever transcribed the text probably mistook "ru'u" for "vu'u". -- Nisha, 26, clutching an ice cream and her toddler son, read impassively through a leaflet calling for immediate dialogue with Pakistan to avert the horror of a nuclear war. "Why should we worry about this?" she said with a shrug. "India has more nuclear weapons than Pakistan. We will wipe them off the map and win the war."