From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Apr 16 03:15:14 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_5); 16 Apr 2003 10:15:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 62702 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2003 10:15:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 16 Apr 2003 10:15:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Apr 2003 10:15:13 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 195jwc-0001DA-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 03:15:10 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195jvA-0001Cf-00; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 03:13:40 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 16 Apr 2003 03:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail0.epfl.ch ([128.178.50.57]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 195jsJ-0001C5-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 03:10:43 -0700 Received: (qmail 16753 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2003 10:10:36 -0000 Received: from icin2pc71.epfl.ch (HELO ICIN2PC71W) (128.178.158.171) by mail0.epfl.ch with SMTP; 16 Apr 2003 10:10:36 -0000 Message-ID: <003501c30400$6c9aa0d0$ab9eb280@ic.intranet.epfl.ch> To: References: Subject: [lojban] Re: mi'e Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 12:10:36 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-archive-position: 4792 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: gregory.dyke@epfl.ch Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: "Gregory Dyke" From: "Gregory Dyke" Reply-To: gregory.dyke@epfl.ch X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out > It was parsed by jbofi'e, but with wrong semantics. Of course, > {nu facki} needs {le} in front of it! And it seems {segugdrkoria} > is not recognized as I intended... Should I say {selgugdrkoria}, > using lujvo {selgugde}? why using selgugde? When type 2/3 fu'ivla are constructed, the main idea is to have them preceded with a semantical category. so gugdrkoria > > mi'e sanxiyn.