From jjllambias@hotmail.com Tue Aug 14 11:30:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 14 Aug 2001 18:30:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 36174 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 18:30:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Aug 2001 18:30:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.223) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Aug 2001 18:30:04 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 11:30:04 -0700 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 18:30:03 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] selma'o considered harmful Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 18:30:03 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2001 18:30:04.0170 (UTC) FILETIME=[22BD4EA0:01C124EF] From: "Jorge Llambias" la djeikomnek cusku di'e >{mi junta du do} mi junta dunli do Or if you want more stringency: mi do dunli le ka makau ce'u junta >I wouldn't advocate something like that for the logically stringent, >but it seems far more convinent than > >{lo junta be mi du lo junta be do} or >{lo ni junta mi kei du lo ni junta do kei} or even >{mi du do tedu'i le ka junta} (I wouldn't use the last two.) {junta} itself is one of those inexplicable gismu. Why is there a gismu for weight, but none for height, length, size, age, speed, beauty, and so many other names of properties. >Sigh. Of course, I'm probably missing something. > >(I'll admit to not having any idea what good du would do as seltau, >however.) How about {du karda} for "i.d. card"? mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp