From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Apr 29 06:27:27 2011 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Fri, 29 Apr 2011 06:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QFnjC-000860-QD for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 06:27:27 -0700 Received: from nm23.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([66.94.237.88]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QFnj6-00080E-Qr for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 06:27:25 -0700 Received: from [66.94.237.195] by nm23.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Apr 2011 13:27:14 -0000 Received: from [66.94.237.117] by tm6.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Apr 2011 13:27:14 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1022.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Apr 2011 13:27:14 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 450674.79219.bm@omp1022.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 72124 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Apr 2011 13:27:14 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rogers.com; s=s1024; t=1304083633; bh=maCeomqwO1W7L7DzGR9NdqR5iczcdCPtytk1oGoXgEY=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ae8+oCa/SePepQuJ7ZxOMj4WHnyrFQB9cwh+Yg5cNsUPJ86JTkQBlUp5/Ewh5ww/ffkOqqS9A6VbKdTY1IpdU18U9yc7SUq4gPDl1RhI3xIR45AF9V2oWsN6GDHv3PTJrh2JmmtkThpNf11qvBRn8haKTqAzaUWWcYitL+6spy0= DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=na3sN3hDhwdaj1iycV9gfiqWwSO5eopQ/sMd3B1ksiNjlIIqe7XGY7kJ9M9S9dorWN6vJJNWPndUlloEld3O1wW6DyvkcezL8L6LpcERmrkSbaCauX2v4VsLOFIxHsAXVHTQMJ2CqBPPBG8NBrfRnW3TM2euYLNmIOYSP4TW/0Q=; Message-ID: <906137.67101.qm@web88001.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: QBNBl.MVM1nle8e7.MjwCwdsArO2SHlrHjuw4hKQo.f_BuS .REk4MdHhfgEU3z0Nghv9ajm3xoUadGp0sHpBlARTupuWsMNPx4.KmThgiyw SefUmMqKN5rnpJwDUW4rDoUsaqXwN6XTl0QM0QBIDZXj4LVxjh1cyR81V1tq nxZdde3MwLt.FsrQAqEQnI_MoWUUj7RRzbDO3cIe.4gZPyH.Mm6ASip7F7tJ rKPW79yHsqHP6RspRRjb8.EytarKUIlqde7SJz7Cyi5PSRWmWP1xJKP36xfK CcDpQrcoeQ1elp1l7zQeTV4SMwgYx_U3drUWT4x6L7OierOoth4KG7nfdQfn FCDaT1mUvYxHQT.BqQY_fvrpqciysv1iyUZhMd6idYPrWxXditpupmYux6Ax WdkAO7XT70_AelqE- Received: from [99.240.58.72] by web88001.mail.re2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 06:27:13 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/559 YahooMailWebService/0.8.110.299900 References: <62188.7337.qm@web88006.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <201104281051.16301.phma@phma.optus.nu> <837321.5376.qm@web88004.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <201104290845.39740.phma@phma.optus.nu> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 06:27:13 -0700 (PDT) From: "A. PIEKARSKI" Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: Military ranks To: jbovlaste@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <201104290845.39740.phma@phma.optus.nu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-archive-position: 17 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: totus@rogers.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste > > On Thursday 28 April 2011 13:57:15 A. PIEKARSKI wrote: > > Would a comma suffice, as in "jatcrxof,pano"? > > It suffices (and isn't even necessary) in this case, but if the number is ze, > you need a vowel. "jatnrxof,ze" is invalid. > > > What advantage would "zelmoikle jianrale" offer over "zelmoikle jatna"? > > "jianrale" without a number gives a general idea of the rank of general. A > jatna can be any rank, and doesn't even have to be in the military. > Right!  But we can easily deal with this by defining lujvo such as "zelmoikleja'a" for Major General. Looking at your other suggestion, what would you suggest for the middle ranks (Xiao + ? = ?) and lower ranks (Wei +? = ?)?  In many countries, the division is between commissioned and non-commissioned officers - which just doesn't map onto the Chinese system.  I think we should stay out of that.  Combining the Chinese word for "officer" with the Anglo-Euro "officer" for all levels would do it, but I don't know if there is one Chinese word for officer.  I have found "Jūnguān" for officer, but I don't really know if that is the right word. mu'o mi'e .andrus.