From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Dec 03 14:49:47 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 22:49:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 40186 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 22:49:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 22:49:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 22:49:31 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 14:49:31 -0800 Received: from 200.42.118.77 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 03 Dec 2000 22:49:31 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.118.77] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: le brajatna Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 22:49:31 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2000 22:49:31.0547 (UTC) FILETIME=[4CB206B0:01C05D7B] From: "Jorge Llambias" la aulun cusku di'e > > I suggest {ze'u pa snidu} = "for the very long time interval > > of one second". > >Wouldn't {ze'u lo snidu} do as well? Yes. >or just {ze'u snidu} No, that's a selbri. The bridi already had a selbri: catlu. >Do we really need lujvo like {srenoi}? >stidi lu loi/lei srera notci be le tcima li'u I like that better too, but I don't think we have to worry about creating "unneeded" lujvo. It is fine to make one up for a single instance of use. co'o mi'e xorxes _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com