From: "Apache" <apache@digitalkingdom.org>
To: curtis289@att.net
Reply-To: webmaster@lojban.org
Subject: [jvsw] Definition Added At Word launzu -- By krtisfranks
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:32:15 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <E1bDN6N-0004x7-AF@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
X-Spam_score: 0.5
X-Spam_score_int: 5
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org",
 has NOT identified this incoming email as spam.  The original
 message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  In jbovlaste, the user krtisfranks has added a definition
   of "launzu" in the language "English". New Data: Definition: $x_1$ is a relative
    of $x_2$ such that they both share an effective family tree which includes
    a common relative $x_3$; $x_1$ is a relative of $x_2$ on $x_3$'s side of
   the family. [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (0.5 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED          ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
                             See
                             http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
                              for more information.
                             [URIs: lojban.org]
  1.4 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT   RBL: No description available.
                             [173.13.139.235 listed in bb.barracudacentral.org]
 -1.9 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
                             [score: 0.0000]
  1.0 RDNS_DYNAMIC           Delivered to internal network by host with
                             dynamic-looking rDNS


In jbovlaste, the user krtisfranks has added a
definition of "launzu" in the language "English".

New Data:

	Definition:
		$x_1$ is a relative of $x_2$ such that they both share an effective family tree which includes a common relative $x_3$; $x_1$ is a relative of $x_2$ on $x_3$'s side of the family.

	Notes:
		$x_1$ and $x_2$ are mutually symmetric under exchange. Technically $x_1$ (therefore, also $x_2$) and $x_3$ are mutually so, as well. However, $x_3$ will typically be used in order to identify the 'side of the family tree/genealogy' being considered and $x_2$ will typically be the focal point at which the several sides of family trees (including the considered one) intersect (being otherwise disjoint); as such, $x_2$'s paternal uncle will not be described as being $x_2$'s father's brother on $x_2$'s side of the tree. In other words, there is a large family tree with at least two 'sides' and they intersect at exactly one node; this node of intersection is canonically to typically be $x_2$ and $x_3$ is canonically to be used to designate which of these possible sides is being considered such that $x_1$ belongs to it. The larger family tree is the graph which the utterer and/or relatives mention consider to be the entirety of the family of all the relatives mentioned; thus, it may include marriages, god-children, close friends, and exes, but it is unlikely to span over many generations. For example, maternal and paternal sides of families are considered to be separate sides of the family tree for a child, even if in the distant unknown past, that father and that mother share some sort of familial relationship (even including a biological common ancestor). This word can be used to hint at a path in the graph from $x_1$ to $x_2$, since there exists a path which connects them and which also includes $x_3$; therefore, it can be used to vaguely mean "my onclic aunt-in-law by my Uncle John" meaning that the referent is the utterer's Uncle John's wife's sister (or sister in law); use connectives in $x_3$ in order to include (if the connective means "AND") more nodes which must have paths (not necessarily the same ones) running through them from $x_1$ to $x_2$. This word does not actually specify any of the relations between $x_1$, $x_2$, or $x_3$ arguments; it merely claims that they are all related and belong to a common (effective) family tree. Use tanru or {lanzu} for greater detail.

	Jargon:
		

	Gloss Keywords:
		Word: paternal relative, In Sense: 
		Word: maternal relative, In Sense: 
		Word: side of a family tree, In Sense: 

	Place Keywords:


You can go to <http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/launzu> to see it.