From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Wed Oct 16 16:57:02 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_2_1); 16 Oct 2002 23:57:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 78039 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2002 23:57:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 16 Oct 2002 23:57:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Oct 2002 23:57:01 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Wed, 16 Oct 2002 17:30:04 +0100 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 15:53:51 +0100 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 15:53:37 +0100 To: lojban Subject: jvoste Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline From: And Rosta X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=810630 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Are the lujvo in NORALUJV.txt drawn from usage, or were they thought up by = the compiler of the list? Are the lujvo in NORALUJV.tx well-formed by the standard criteria of apposi= teness and seljvajvohood? What processes are in place for sifting usage for new lujvo? Should we each= be making the effort to document our lujvo usage? Is anyone studying rafsi preferences? The lujvo in the jvoste are listed in= =20 their shortest possible form, but I dimly recall Nick (or someone) research= ing=20 the issue several years ago and finding that CXXCy rafsi were preferred to CVCy and CV'V(r). --And.