From cowan@ccil.org Mon Dec 11 04:02:02 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: cowan@locke.ccil.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Dec 2000 12:02:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 93317 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2000 12:02:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Dec 2000 12:02:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO locke.ccil.org) (192.190.237.102) by mta3 with SMTP; 11 Dec 2000 13:03:06 -0000 Received: from localhost (cowan@localhost) by locke.ccil.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA16653; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:26:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:26:24 -0500 (EST) To: Pierre Abbat Cc: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] fu'ivla tarmi In-Reply-To: <0012091808170I.20188@neofelis> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-eGroups-From: John Cowan From: John Cowan On Sat, 9 Dec 2000, Pierre Abbat wrote: > I am making a table of fu'ivla tarmi and have hit a snag. Is CVCCVVCV a valid > fu'ivla tarmi? It could break into CV CCVVCV, where CCVVCV is a known valid > fu'ivla tarmi, but the rules don't say anything about fu'ivla breaking into > fu'ivla. The rules for valid fu'ivla are known to be incomplete. It's clear to me, however, that anything which breaks up is not valid. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore --Douglas Hofstadter