From mathmaniac@hanmail.net Mon Apr 21 01:10:25 2003
Return-Path: <mathmaniac@hanmail.net>
X-Sender: mathmaniac@hanmail.net
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_5); 21 Apr 2003 08:10:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 91814 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2003 08:10:25 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
  by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 21 Apr 2003 08:10:25 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n12.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.67)
  by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 21 Apr 2003 08:10:25 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.165] by n12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 21 Apr 2003 08:10:24 -0000
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 08:10:24 -0000
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Quoting "zoi"
Message-ID: <b8091g+o89d@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 524
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
From: "sshiskom" <mathmaniac@hanmail.net>
X-Originating-IP: 143.248.205.98
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122399845
X-Yahoo-Profile: sshiskom

On IRC, I tried to quote the word {zoi} and wrote {zo zoi}.
Surprisingly, jbofi'e didn't parse it. So I checked Reference
Grammar, and it seems ZOI takes precedence over ZO.

Is there any reason for this? It makes quoting the word {zoi}
difficult -- I am obliged to say {zoi gy. zoi .gy} or something
like that. On the other hand, if ZO takes precedence over ZOI,
the word {zo} would be {zo zo} and the word {zoi} would be
{zo zoi}. I see no disadvantage and one advantage of this
idea over current baseline.

mi'e sanxiyn.