From topaz@linkline.com Sat Dec 02 11:40:20 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: topaz@linkline.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 19:40:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 95786 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 19:39:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 19:39:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 20:40:45 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: topaz@linkline.com Received: from [10.1.10.100] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Dec 2000 19:39:33 -0000 Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 19:39:21 -0000 To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: zoi gy. Good Morning! .gy. Message-ID: <90bj59+d6vt@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 751 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.30.217.112 From: "David Scriven" --- In lojban@egroups.com, EWC wrote: > {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}. > > However, {cerni zei coi} would be a zei-lujvo, meaning something about > mornings and greetings, although I'm not sure exactly what. Would {ceryrinsa - vacrinsa - cterinsa}, etc. be acceptable/understandable, at least as translation devices to represent conventional time-conditioned greetings from other languages?