Subject: Re: [lojban] years & numbers

From: Pierre Abbat <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 16:44:23 -0400

On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Alfred W. Tueting (Tüting) wrote:
>{ci [lo] nanca} or better {nanca li ci}??
>{le ci nanca} - {le nanca be li ci}?

{le ci nanca} could be the years 1776, 1868, and 1971, but {le nanca be li ci}
could not; it is a three-year time span.

>{lo nanca xirma} - x2-default=1
>{loi nanca be li ci be'o finpe} (it doesn't work with {crisa} which
>would give a German fishery term :-)

"Skol'ko tebe let? -Mne chetyre goda."

>{lo nanca be li paxa be'o nixli} (le nixli cu nanca li paxa)
>{lo nixli co nanca li paxa}
> or (worse?)
>{lo paxa [bo] nanca nixli}

The first one seems correct, the second also sounds correct but jbofi'e seems
to think it's 16 yearling girls, and it barfs on the third.

phma