From jjllambias@hotmail.com Mon Jun 11 17:06:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 12 Jun 2001 00:06:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 77130 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2001 00:06:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 12 Jun 2001 00:06:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.161) by mta2 with SMTP; 12 Jun 2001 00:06:09 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 17:06:07 -0700 Received: from 200.69.11.252 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 00:06:07 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.69.11.252] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: RE: [lojban] Purpose of bridi Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 00:06:07 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jun 2001 00:06:07.0505 (UTC) FILETIME=[7A961010:01C0F2D3] From: "Jorge Llambias" la kreig cusku di'e >nei = this bridi, it seemed to fit. Notice the difference between {nei} and {dei}. {nei} is a predicate, {dei} is an argument. {dei sedu'u nei}, or is it {dei sedu'u no'a}? >But it makes me wonder - if I just say >.i nei haven't I just told you about an infinite string of .i's? or have I >not said anything? An infinite string of i's is more or less nothing anyway. {nei} is just one of those useless cmavo occupying the short form that should have gone to something more useful... mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.