From phma@webjockey.net Mon Feb 24 16:16:10 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 25 Feb 2003 00:16:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 89380 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2003 00:16:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 25 Feb 2003 00:16:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO blackcat.ixazon.lan) (62.226.181.108) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 25 Feb 2003 00:16:09 -0000 Received: by blackcat.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 1C99641C7; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 00:16:10 +0000 (UTC) Organization: dis To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] la batoir.Erjebet Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 01:16:09 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200302250116.09747.phma@webjockey.net> From: Pierre Abbat X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=92712300 On Monday 24 February 2003 01:54, Jorge Llambias wrote: > la pier cusku di'e > > >Which of the following is correct?: > >.i la batoir.Erjebet. magjaro ke nobli je ke porsi catra > >.i la batoir.Erjebet. magjaro nobli je ke porsi catra > >.i la batoir.Erjebet. magjaro ke nobli je porsi catra > >.i la batoir.Erjebet. magjaro nobli je porsi catra > >.i la batoir.Erjebet. magjaro nobli gi'e porsi catra > > I don't know who la batoir is, but it would seem they can > all be correct and true. The fourth is the oddest though, as it > would seem to say that he is a "noble and sequential" type > of killer. But you never know with tanru. It would mean, I think, that her victims were noble people who were also sequences and who had something to do with Hungarian or Hungarians. I think that that is nonsense. {magjaro nobli je te porsi catra} makes sense, but is false - almost all her victims were peasants. phma -- .i toljundi do .ibabo mi'afra tu'a do .ibabo damba do .ibabo do jinga .icu'u la ma'atman.