From ragnarok@pobox.com Fri Aug 03 10:53:38 2001
Return-Path: <raganok@intrex.net>
X-Sender: raganok@intrex.net
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 3 Aug 2001 17:53:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 9326 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 17:51:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Aug 2001 17:51:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.246) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Aug 2001 17:51:30 -0000
Received: from Craig [209.42.200.34] by intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id A4C11AD40196; Fri, 03 Aug 2001 13:52:01 -0400
Reply-To: <ragnarok@pobox.com>
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] commands
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:51:30 -0400
Message-ID: <LPBBLNNHBOGBGAINBIEFAEMOCCAA.raganok@intrex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010803125957.00b77e90@pop.cais.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-eGroups-From: "Craig" <raganok@intrex.net>
From: "Craig" <ragnarok@pobox.com>

>"lets go" has a different solution, either using ".e'u" for suggestion with
>a bridi, or if you want an assertive sense "doi mi'o ko cliva

Doesn't allowing .e'u or .e'o to make a command contradict actual usage,
which is supposed to decide everything? The precedent is that an .e'o or
.e'u still needs a ko to be a command - {.e'osai ko sarji la lojban.} for
example.

BTW, what (if anything) does "doi mi ko klama" mean?