Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
Delivery-date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 06:59:10 -0800
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 15:58:04 +0100
From: Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org>
To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: eyeglasses vs contact lenses vs etc
Message-ID: <20100304145803.GI8253@nvg.org>
References: <4de8c3931003040522m26d25b38wf82180dfdaa27589@mail.gmail.com> <20100304135115.GH8253@nvg.org> <233463.92445.qm@web88002.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <233463.92445.qm@web88002.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org
Content-Length: 2449
Lines: 52

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 06:35:08AM -0800, A. PIEKARSKI wrote:

> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org>
> > To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
> > Sent: Thu, March 4, 2010 8:51:15 AM
> > Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: eyeglasses vs contact lenses vs etc
> > 
> > On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:22:12PM +0000, tijlan wrote:
> > jbovlaste 
> > currently has {le'otci} for "eyeglasses/spectacles". But
> > {le'otci} must 
> > include also "contact lenses", "hand lenses",
> > "telescope lenses", and 
> > every other types of tool with a lens as its
> > main component.
> 
> It's 
> > too late for that. {le'otci} already means “eyeglasses”. If you want something 
> > that could mean any kind of lens tool, use {lenjo tutci}.
> 
> Why is it to late?  Just because {le'otci} is in jbovlaste doesn't mean it's carved in stone.

No, of course not. But it has been in different lujvo lists since the early 90s. That, in itself, doesn't count for much (there are lots of completely hopeless lujvo in those lists after all), but IMHO it strengthens the case when it also has had some usage.

> And I don't see that {le'otci} has been used that much in the past anyway.

I found three on Google:

| .i ko'a pilno lo cukla le'otci gi'e dasni lo bebna purci taxfu
-- http://www.handgranat.org/Jikybebna

| doi #lojban mi puzi cpacu le cnino le'otci .uicai
-- http://twitter.com/lbergen/status/8737360775

| .ije mi'o dasni lo solri le'otci
-- http://www.mail-archive.com/lojban-beginners@lojban.org/msg03212.html

There might be more in the mail archives or IRC logs. I did not find any occurrences of {kaldadle'o}.

My point is that comparatively little weight should be given to arguments of the form “The tanru of lujvo X could refer to any kind of Y, therefore the lujvo X should refer to Y in general, and no other, more precise concept”.

We have a way to express “eyeglasses”. We have a way to express “lens tool”. It doesn't _hurt_ to have more ways to say “eyeglasses”, but it's not _necessary_. And we can't just widen the meaning of the word {le'otci} when it has been used by people who know what they're doing.

By the way, I couldn't find any existing words for “contact lens”, so the fact that tijlan is trying to make one is very good. Anything with {snipa} + {lenjo} would probably be adequate.

-- 
Arnt Richard Johansen                                http://arj.nvg.org/
Kortet Deres er beholdt.