From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Tue Oct 01 18:17:22 2002
Return-Path: <lojban-out@lojban.org>
X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 2 Oct 2002 01:17:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 46706 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2002 01:17:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
  by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Oct 2002 01:17:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175)
  by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2002 01:17:20 -0000
Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05)
  id 17wYBg-0001QD-00
  for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 01 Oct 2002 18:20:28 -0700
Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain)
  by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05)
  id 17wYB0-0001Pp-00; Tue, 01 Oct 2002 18:19:47 -0700
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 01 Oct 2002 18:19:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailbox-14.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.114])
  by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05)
  id 17wYAx-0001Pf-00
  for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 01 Oct 2002 18:19:43 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-68-149.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.68.149])
  by mailbox-14.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E845947F7F
  for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 03:16:02 +0200 (DST)
To: <lojban-list@lojban.org>
Subject: [lojban] Re: tu'o du'u (was Re: xoi'a)
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 02:17:39 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMMEOIGJAA.a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <20021002011500.GA72604@allusion.net>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Importance: Normal
X-archive-position: 1804
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk
Precedence: bulk
X-list: lojban-list
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
Reply-To: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811
X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin

Jordan:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 01:58:55AM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> [...]
> > (I do wish {tu'o du'u} could be reduced to one syllable. It'd be the
> > ultimate Zipfean saving. Are there any monosyllables still going
> > spare?)
> 
> Errr; doesn't it need to be said a lot to justify that? No offense
> intended, but I've never seen anyone say it except you (I think it
> was the wiki page for poi'i). I'm not even sure what an unspecified
> number of du'us means that is different from the assumed default of
> su'opa if you were to say "lo du'u", "le du'u", or "lo'e du'u".

Other jboskepre have used "tu'o du'u", but the abbreviation could
equally well be short for "lo'e du'u".

If I'd been designing Lojban syntax I'd allow a selbri to function
as a sumti ("mi djuno lo'e du'u do klama" => "djuno mi klama do"),
but given the constraints of Lojban grammar it would be nice to
be able to reduce it to "mi djuno XOI do klama", where XOI is short
for lo'e du'u.

{le du'u} is used a lot by everybody (though {le} is not really
appropriate there), and many uses of {le nu} should have {du'u}
instead (though maybe usage is improving in this regard?).

--And.