From xod@thestonecutters.net Mon Apr 28 13:36:59 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 28 Apr 2003 20:36:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 84235 invoked from network); 28 Apr 2003 20:36:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Apr 2003 20:36:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Apr 2003 20:36:57 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19AFMu-0001Ne-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:36:56 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AFMW-0001MW-00; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:36:32 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.111.194.10] (helo=granite.thestonecutters.net) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AFME-0001K2-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:36:14 -0700 Received: from granite.thestonecutters.net (localhost.thestonecutters.net [127.0.0.1]) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.12.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3SKaPAN041392 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 16:36:25 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) with ESMTP id h3SKaPNf041389 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 16:36:25 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) X-Authentication-Warning: granite.thestonecutters.net: xod owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 16:36:25 -0400 (EDT) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] nai in UI (was: BPFK phpbb) In-Reply-To: <20030428194858.18292.qmail@web20506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030428162158.A32091-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-archive-position: 4987 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Invent Yourself Reply-To: xod@thestonecutters.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Jorge Llambías wrote: > > la camgusmis cusku di'e > > > My new example of how insane this is is > > > > nai nai nai mi nai nelci nai nai nai > > > > which would be legal if this change was made. > > nai nai nai na'e bo mi na'e na'e na'e nelci > > is currently grammatical (and equally bad style). As is "jai jai jai na'e jai je'a klesi jai cupra", which was offered by a random sentence generator, and defended by Jay as being grammatical, and yet now we're supposed to get our panties twisted at the fear of "nai nai nai". -- In an opinion poll conducted in early March by Zogby, 97% of Saudis said they had an unfavorable opinion of the US. "I think that underestimates it," said Awardh Badhi, a political scientist with the Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies.