From ragnarok@pobox.com Wed Aug 15 05:14:05 2001
Return-Path: <raganok@intrex.net>
X-Sender: raganok@intrex.net
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 15 Aug 2001 12:14:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 18579 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 12:14:04 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26)
  by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Aug 2001 12:14:04 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.246)
  by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Aug 2001 12:14:04 -0000
Received: from Craig [209.42.200.34] by intrex.net
  (SMTPD32-5.05) id A79EF18C00E0; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 08:14:22 -0400
Reply-To: <ragnarok@pobox.com>
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] Chomskyan universals and Lojban
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 08:14:04 -0400
Message-ID: <LPBBLNNHBOGBGAINBIEFGEBLCDAA.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: <Pine.SOL.3.95.1010815095333.15857B-100000@babel>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
X-eGroups-From: "Craig" <raganok@intrex.net>
From: "Craig" <ragnarok@pobox.com>

>Does anyone know
>i) either any counter-examples in natural languages?

None that I can think of.

>ii) or why lojban is this way round?

My two theories:
1. It is more common to discuss sellers than buyers, and 'le vecnu' is more
succinct than 'le se vecnu.'
2. I have heard that choices of gismu were based on Basic English, which
does not have a word for buy. But I just checked, and that doesn't work
because it doesn't have a word for 'sell' either.

--la kreig.daniyl.

'segu le bavli temci gi mi'o renvi lo purci
.i ga le fonxa janbe gi du mi'
-la djimis.BYFet

xy.sy. gubmau ckiku nacycme: 0x5C3A1E74