Return-path: X-Spam-Personal-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Delivery-date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 03:26:50 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NUIPZ-0002DY-8W; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 03:26:30 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 03:25:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NUIOf-0002DM-0R for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 03:25:21 -0800 Received: from mail-fx0-f211.google.com ([209.85.220.211]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NUIOV-0002Ba-EO for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 03:25:20 -0800 Received: by fxm3 with SMTP id 3so11773809fxm.4 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 03:25:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wo4ZerjarCECctSkOq+ou72Q+TVG2umTGDyrKOMDJQ8=; b=AkBB/Z9pYQO2jqwYXpKC6ClkkKpyEY1SvBtBfk6I+xV3vL4PmkxtWcnGbiswMmbXq0 fXcNyMKMjDaBC5ZFtw8lNGHt+1GmgwEjPkfje/Zd2aUmRHJvJHeoG9lL073fySXBQ0G5 MsZMT3ECQj+ABFlrlHjnGgiM2vpVOPqCYdSVU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=w5jZx8Uadel3CangO7Ll+yIH49oc7uPuawIgyilb/ekqvam25wiWqAYwHDf2vlP6KS +mccIOrjhalwDTsgl+vupSgXukjul3Fu4LNw0j2oCgOK8BGVsxqyKL6fSN84xaJu8+cE Hn3ApJvGyus6ZL/a27tioK6G0zJJe9SPf6vv0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.102.169.26 with SMTP id r26mr1316469mue.27.1263209104060; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 03:25:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20100111072345.GA7910@digitalkingdom.org> References: <20100111072345.GA7910@digitalkingdom.org> From: Daniel Brockman Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:24:44 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: fa1b1ba8dd7d113f Message-ID: Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: Random thought on how to make fu'ivla To: jbovlaste@lojban.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: daniel@brockman.se Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste Content-Length: 1021 Lines: 30 On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > It seems to me that we should make fu'ivla, at least sometimes, the > way English does: by contracting annoyingly long compound words. > > Example: "cellphone", which is its own word short for "cellular > telephone" (at least), which are themselves compounds if I'm not > mistaken.  It seems to me that we could do something similar, by > creating the crazy-long jvajvo word and then, if it's popular, > ripping parts out in such a way as to create a *fu'ivla* rather than > a less-jva-jvo > > Just a thought. That's a very good idea, and I couldn't approve more. This provides a middle ground between lujvo, which tend to become too long, and fu'ivla, which are too arbitrary. As a bonus, it blurs the lines between the different kinds of brivla, which lines in my opinion are currently way too sharp: people seldom talk about brivla, but often talk about gismu, lujvo and fu'ivla. -- Daniel Brockman daniel@brockman.se