From jjllambias@hotmail.com Mon Sep 30 09:13:45 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 30 Sep 2002 16:13:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 79887 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2002 16:13:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Sep 2002 16:13:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.76) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Sep 2002 16:13:43 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:13:42 -0700 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 16:13:42 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] LOI PRENU GO PA MEI GI KA'E NAI TE JINGA? Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 16:13:42 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Sep 2002 16:13:42.0891 (UTC) FILETIME=[588233B0:01C2689C] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la and cusku di'e >How about {loi prenu go pa mei gi ka'e nai te jinga} >that sounds pretty coolass to me -- something John might consent to chant. Yes, but {lei prenu} rather than {loi prenu}. Any individual person, any pair, any threesome, can instantiate {loi prenu}. That says "Some people, united, can never be defeated", not what we mean. {ka'enai} is not grammatical officially, but it has wide usage support. John's {ginai ka'e} alternative is good too. The causal relationship has to be groked from context, I suppose. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com