Return-path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_DKIM_INVALID,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Personal-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Delivery-date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:41:29 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([192.168.123.127]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ObhyH-0007LO-8t; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:41:04 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ObhxY-0007LE-VB for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:40:17 -0700 Received: from mail-pv0-f181.google.com ([74.125.83.181]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ObhxT-0007Kk-Px for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:40:16 -0700 Received: by pvg2 with SMTP id 2so4355691pvg.40 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:40:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=M9ecdZcH9sskNioDGp76y/gllPy9hRqOvci9IDrvGTs=; b=ugias8f0+rOGPWLSYjWWX7n1wDOWhKAcsv2ME9T6VMMynUgxXgzC/MpynLKlIpPMAN 1toqBOelE7MlgWaXzp/Ub0LKOU7592VIIVx0aVLZkms6bzT6E5L+aIfpbSm5wud0nF64 XKEnCAf9VkWT0roZnmjz8llqiqfnE5BcMah9k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=HnTj+QTzVqDmGmKag+/i5Gv2M8AJKpLeKwrreKTszsL9F5I6oMU4HLUc7sm/8nZSSj WYyIyxmzp75bCAp6bBkNG5enUrwaMAWRqpOBHwalv89tv1ibYLT6JKKqA4qn6MwA1ARS oW7kpJFAodYy5pE+/3Zap9iT1SCRu4U5uz9lo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.199.21 with SMTP id w21mr1088420wff.140.1279752002953; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:40:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.144.17 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:40:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C477135.9060106@perpetuum-immobile.de> References: <20100721191512.GS16391@nvg.org> <4C477135.9060106@perpetuum-immobile.de> Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 16:40:02 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: stuffed animal From: Jonathan Jones To: jbovlaste@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd312fc896998048bed7b17 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: eyeonus@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste Content-Length: 2688 Lines: 73 --000e0cd312fc896998048bed7b17 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thank you, Theodore Roosevelt, for giving us Americans something more original to call a bear-shaped pillow. All hail the Teddy Bear! On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Timo Paulssen < timonator@perpetuum-immobile.de> wrote: > On 07/21/2010 09:15 PM, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote: > > Of the languages I understand, English is the only language in which the > word for stuffed animal explicitly includes its stuffedness. Other languages > use words based on its purpose (cuddling/hugging), or its composition > (fabric). > > > I, too, would want to ask you not to use tisna for "stuffed animal". It > seems very anglocentric to me. In German, we simply call them > "Kuscheltier" (to-be-cuddled animal), which is, in my opinion, the best > semantic property of a stuffed animal (especially since those animals > that hang around in museums or whatever are also stuffed animals, but in > no way there for cuddling) > > mu'o mi'e timos > > > > -- mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu --000e0cd312fc896998048bed7b17 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thank you, Theodore Roosevelt, for giving us Americans something more origi= nal to call a bear-shaped pillow. All hail the Teddy Bear!

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Timo Paulssen <timonator@p= erpetuum-immobile.de> wrote:
On 07/21/2010 09:15 PM, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote:
> Of the languages I understand, English is the only language in which t= he word for stuffed animal explicitly includes its stuffedness. Other langu= ages use words based on its purpose (cuddling/hugging), or its composition = (fabric).
>
I, too, would want to ask you not to use tisna for "stuffed anim= al". It
seems very anglocentric to me. In German, we simply call them
"Kuscheltier" (to-be-cuddled animal), which is, in my opinion, th= e best
semantic property of a stuffed animal (especially since those animals
that hang around in museums or whatever are also stuffed animals, but in no way there for cuddling)

mu'o mi'e timos






--
mu'o mi'e .aion= ys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu

--000e0cd312fc896998048bed7b17--