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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham 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, 24 Nov 2010 07:21:06 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([192.168.123.127]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PLH9F-0006bO-2E; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:20:41 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:19:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PLH8R-0006am-05 for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:19:51 -0800 Received: from mail-yx0-f181.google.com ([209.85.213.181]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PLH8L-0006Tx-93 for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:19:50 -0800 Received: by yxd39 with SMTP id 39so14004119yxd.40 for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:19:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.209.15 with SMTP id h15mr1530267ang.107.1290611978941; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:19:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from sunflowerriver.org (173-10-243-253-Albuquerque.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.10.243.253]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x39sm1922419ana.26.2010.11.24.07.19.36 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:19:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 08:19:34 -0700 From: Alan Post To: jbovlaste@lojban.org Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: fu'ivla for liquors Message-ID: <20101124151934.GA12462@alice.local> Mail-Followup-To: jbovlaste@lojban.org References: <770898.27481.qm@web88001.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <201011232247.21133.phma@phma.optus.nu> <956656.46566.qm@web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <956656.46566.qm@web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: alanpost@sunflowerriver.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste Content-Length: 1499 Lines: 40 On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 06:13:38AM -0800, A. Piekarski wrote: > > > > > > 1) koinka (cognac) > > > > I was going to say that this one sounds funny and suggest "konjaku", but that > > was immediately stopped by another thought: lo konjaku is a certain species > > of Amorphophallus. Another similar-sounding word is "kuinke", which > > means "Seri" (a people of Mexico, or their language, which has no close > > relatives). So I think it's good, as long as we don't use it for vanjyjikru > > in general. > > > > > 4) campana (champagne) > > > > I suggest "campania", as both "gn" in French and "ñ" in Spanish denote the > > palatal nasal. Hindi has such a sound (or at least Nagari has a letter for > > it); I guess they borrowed the word from English. > > > > Which brings up the issue of what exactly 'cognac' and 'champagne' mean. > Strictly speaking, cognacs and champagnes come from very specific areas in > France.  If they don't, then they are brandies and sparkling wines. > > However, in most countries, colloquially (wine) brandy and sparkling wine > ARE referred to as 'cognac' and 'champagne'.  My view nonetheless is that we > should stick to the strict definition, but I'm open to arguement. > > Opinions? > I broadly agree that we should stick to the strict definitions. I'm curious *why* the strict definitions refer to products from specific areas of France, and whether that reason is sufficient to carry into a fu'ivla. -Alan -- .i ko djuno fi le do sevzi