From pycyn@aol.com Mon Oct 28 07:00:54 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_2_1); 28 Oct 2002 15:00:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 30024 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2002 15:00:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Oct 2002 15:00:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m06.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.161) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Oct 2002 15:00:53 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.16c.163dfd61 (4004) for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:00:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <16c.163dfd61.2aeeab20@aol.com> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:00:48 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] jmina vs. vimcu To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_16c.163dfd61.2aeeab20_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_16c.163dfd61.2aeeab20_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/28/2002 1:26:55 AM Central Standard Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes: << > Why is the x2 of jmina the thing added to, but the x3 of vimcu is the > thing subtracted from? >> 'Tain't. That is, this is the wrong question. The right one is "Why is the second definition of {jmina} backwards of the first: "x1 adds x2 to x3 with result x4" but then "x1 augments x2 by x3", when it should be (as {vimcu} and the first definiton show) "x1 augments x3 by x2"? --part1_16c.163dfd61.2aeeab20_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/28/2002 1:26:55 AM Central Standard Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes:

<<
Why is the x2 of jmina the thing added to, but the x3 of vimcu is the
thing subtracted from?

>>
'Tain't.  That is, this is the wrong question.  The right one is "Why is the second definition of {jmina} backwards of the first: "x1 adds x2 to x3 with result x4" but then
"x1 augments x2 by x3", when it should be (as {vimcu} and the first definiton show) "x1 augments x3 by x2"?
 --part1_16c.163dfd61.2aeeab20_boundary--