Subject: Re: [lojban] da'i (for a change)

From: "Jorge Llambias" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 23:25:17

la pycyn cusku di'e

>noda zo'u ge da numcu gi node gi'e numcu gi'i balzma da da'o.i

You have to admit that interpreting you is almost as hard as
interpreting any one else of us. My interpretation:

noda zo'u ge da namcu gi node namcu gi'e balzma da da'o i

>.iseni'i di goi le sumji be xy bei li
>pa zo'u ge di numcu gi di balzma xy .

(Every {iseni'i} should be {iseni'ibo}.)

Shouldn't it be {di no'u le sumji be ...} instead of {goi} here?
{le sumji...} is presumably already assigned, and {di} is not
an assignable variable.

>..i di'u cipra te zukte

{la'e di'u}? And is it really {cipra}? I think I have used
{je'urja'o} for the demonstration sense of proof.

i melbi nu je'urja'o

mu'o mi'e xorxes

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.