From thanatos@dim.com Fri Dec 01 15:09:26 2000
Return-Path: <thanatos@dim.com>
X-Sender: thanatos@dim.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 23:09:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 57924 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 23:09:11 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 23:09:11 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO supernova.dimensional.com) (206.124.0.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 23:09:11 -0000
Received: from p23.3c03.pm.dimcom.net (p23.3c03.pm.dimcom.net [206.124.3.135]) by supernova.dimensional.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id eB1N99B09804 for <lojban@egroups.com>; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 16:09:09 -0700 (MST)
To: lojban@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: zoi gy. Good Morning! .gy.
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 16:09:14 -0700
Message-ID: <h7ag2tclm5ubk8sh4ifl8keksh8jdmcg2e@4ax.com>
References: <52.41e7e38.275978cf@aol.com> <9098op+7065@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <9098op+7065@eGroups.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: EWC <thanatos@dim.com>

On Fri, 01 Dec 2000 22:29:45 -0000, "David Scriven" <topaz@linkline.com>
wrote:
[Re: cercoi =3D morning-deep]
>Hmm... so why doesn't "coico'o" mean "deep goodbye"?

{cercoi} has the form of a lujvo, {coico'o} does not. {coi} is a rafsi
in the first but of selma'o COI in the second. The difference between
the two is that a lujvo must have a consonant pair in the first five
letters. {cercoi} thus forms a single-word lujvo because it can't be
broken up into cmavo, while {coico'o} breaks apart into {coi co'o}.=20=20

However, {cerni zei coi} would be a zei-lujvo, meaning something about
mornings and greetings, although I'm not sure exactly what.

--=20
EWC

