From Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Sun Dec 03 14:25:03 2000
Return-Path: <Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de>
X-Sender: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de
X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 22:25:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 73850 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 22:24:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 22:24:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO fj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.46) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 23:25:49 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de
Received: from [10.1.10.99] by fj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 03 Dec 2000 22:24:43 -0000
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 22:24:36 -0000
To: lojban@egroups.com
Subject: Re: le brajatna
Message-ID: <90eh74+f1m5@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <F162YDlrjbudzxxfYXF0000c953@hotmail.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 575
X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster
X-Originating-IP: 193.149.49.79
From: "=?iso-8859-1?q?Alfred_W._Tueting_(T=FCting)?=" <Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de>

--- In lojban@egroups.com, "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@h...> wrote:

> {cu catlu}, and then {zi zimlu} is not grammatical.
> I suggest {ze'u pa snidu} = "for the very long time interval
> of one second".

Wouldn't {ze'u lo snidu} do as well? or just {ze'u snidu}

> >lu ze'eba nu mi cadzu mo'i zo'a do kai ba mi
> >djica lo bilrinsa .e na'e le tcima srenoi li'u]
> 
> lu ze'ebaku ca le nu mi cadzu mo'i zo'a do kei mi
> djica lo bilrinsa .enai le tcima srenoi li'u

Do we really need lujvo like {srenoi}?
stidi lu loi/lei srera notci be le tcima li'u

co'o mi'e la .aulun.