Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Some comments on the FAQ

From: Robert LeChevalier <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:02:34 -0500

At 01:48 PM 1/17/03 -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote:
>On Friday 17 January 2003 08:46, Newton, Philip wrote:
> > So I'm not sure that the example is that good. (I don't have a better one,
> > however. {pitsa} would be even worse since it's a valid gismu form. Not
> > sure whether there are any other good "quintessential examples", as the FAQ
> > calls it, of fu'ivla.)
>
>I'm not sure what "quintessential example" means, but there are lots of
>fu'ivla, and a couple of lujvo made of fu'ivla, in the taxonomy chart
>(http://www.lojban.org/wiki/index.php/Taxonomy).

There are no officially approved Type IV fu'ivla, and I think Nick is 
planning not to approve any for the dictionary - only type IIIs.

-- 
lojbab [email-masked]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org