From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Tue Apr 29 05:49:18 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 29 Apr 2003 12:49:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 78915 invoked from network); 29 Apr 2003 12:35:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Apr 2003 12:35:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Apr 2003 12:35:30 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19AUKX-0002wo-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 05:35:29 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AUKQ-0002wV-00; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 05:35:22 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 05:35:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web20502.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.226.137]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AUKH-0002wM-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 05:35:13 -0700 Message-ID: <20030429123512.20295.qmail@web20502.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.49.74.2] by web20502.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 05:35:12 PDT Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 05:35:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [lojban] Re: BPFK phpbb To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <20030429011132.GA1205@allusion.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 5004 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Jorge "Llambías" Reply-To: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=142311107 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la djorden cusku di'e > > > things like "leka klama keinai cu xamgu". > > > > I would say it's equivalent to {na'e bo le ka klama cu xamgu}. [...] > It's not how it works now, and if it were how it worked and it were > in UI, then using nai after a terminator as I suggested above would > have Weird Effects; it could not be equivalent to a na'ebo in front > of the last sumti. Indicators used after terminators apply to the whole construction closed by the terminator, there is nothing new about that. {kei} closes {ka} however, not {le}, so I should have said it is equivalent to {le na'e ka klama cu xamgu} or perhaps to {le ka nai klama cu xamgu}. (Maybe those two are equivalent?) > What does nu'inai mean? > nu'i nai ge do mi gi mi do nu'u citka I would presume it is equivalent to: nu'i ganai do mi ginai mi do citka applying DeMorgan's. mu'o mi'e xorxes __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com