Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
Delivery-date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 09:22:57 -0800
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=SPQNKwHe77Urv2EAXcvFZfZO97yrJXl9NNxKJik+CoGRdkgc492GZOWibPuq+qULQ+         q+nZaVUhs0pefpXHYyO22gReL9SeChOSbgKrWgpUch8RwXgv6xy/w4JA3pZjdlY9oTD3         A9FUFePMXMCvi/xIo4b6JVhHwRvlWFDpBw0wI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <991222.68887.qm@web88008.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <871979.97681.qm@web88007.mail.re2.yahoo.com>	<AANLkTik_bGH1G13=kCen4fUPOP9uM0fm=7y2g4jOzcLM@mail.gmail.com>	<201012301329.14902.phma@phma.optus.nu>	<991222.68887.qm@web88008.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 19:21:18 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTimM2=O6w68g3vV3WTUHXKUu=Oh4ZCThri2fVo=W@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: Emperor
From: "Aviv S." <seraviv@gmail.com>
To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016363b8efcc735fa0498b8073a
Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org
Content-Length: 4775
Lines: 109

--0016363b8efcc735fa0498b8073a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I agree that such a distinction between "empires" and "unions" should be
made.
*Maybe* {sorgugnai} (a nation extending several countires) could fit for
"empire".

Furthermore, I think that if the ruler of japan chooses to call himself an
Emperor, that doesnt mean that he has to be an emporer in the lojban sense
of the word (ruler of an empire).
Is "King of th Hill" a king? Is "Dr. Evil" a doctor? No. But they can still
choose to use those titles, devoid of their meaning. We shouldn't have to
"bend" the lojban word for emperor to fit Japan.

And BTW, isn't {noltrunau} and {noltruni'u} the preveiling words for
king/queen? (as used in Alice in Wonderland)

On a side note, I always have thought that finding lojban words for all the
different titles of rulers and governments would be a tough task. But pe'i
it *can* be done, if we ignore the exceptions and treat the word as a rigid
concept, built around the roots of its meaning.

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 6:03 AM, A. PIEKARSKI <totus@rogers.com> wrote:

> >
> > On Thursday 30 December 2010 10:25:14 Remo Dentato wrote:
> > > I've no particular attachment to {sorg'etru} but I feel that
> {balnoltru} is
> > > too restrictive, a "big kingdom" is not an empire since an empire is
> made
> > > by more nations (that might have different languages and cultures and
> even
> > > have a king that is subject to the emperor).
> >
> > Both words are good. The Japanese Emperor cu balnoltru jenai sorgu'etru;
> the
> > government of the EU cu sorgu'etru jenai balnoltru. An emperor in one of
> the
> > ancient empires could be both.
> >
>
> I think we should make a distinction between an empire (one dominant state
> ruling a number of lesser states acquired by conquest, marriage or
> whatever)
> and a union of the EU type (several 'equal' states voluntarily bound
> together
> and governed by a mutually agreed body).  For me the latter would be
> {sorgugje'a} but not the former.
>
> totus
>
>
>
>

--0016363b8efcc735fa0498b8073a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I agree that such a distinction between &quot;empires=
&quot; and &quot;unions&quot; should be made.</div>
<div>*Maybe* {sorgugnai} (a nation extending several countires) could fit f=
or &quot;empire&quot;.</div>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>Furthermore, I think that if the ruler of japan chooses to call himsel=
f an Emperor, that doesnt mean that he has to be an emporer in the lojban s=
ense of the word (ruler of an empire).</div>
<div>Is &quot;King of th Hill&quot; a king? Is &quot;Dr. Evil&quot; a docto=
r? No. But they can still choose to use those titles, devoid of their meani=
ng. We shouldn&#39;t have to &quot;bend&quot; the lojban word for emperor t=
o fit Japan.</div>

<div>=A0</div>
<div>And BTW, isn&#39;t {noltrunau} and {noltruni&#39;u} the preveiling wor=
ds for king/queen? (as used in Alice in Wonderland)</div>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>On a side note, I always have thought that finding lojban words for al=
l the different titles of rulers and governments would be a tough task. But=
 pe&#39;i it *can* be done, if we ignore the exceptions and treat the word =
as a rigid concept, built around the roots of its meaning.<br>
<br></div>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 6:03 AM, A. PIEKARSKI <s=
pan dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:totus@rogers.com">totus@rogers.com</a=
>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex=
; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex" class=3D"gmail_quote">
<div class=3D"im">&gt;<br>&gt; On Thursday 30 December 2010 10:25:14 Remo D=
entato wrote:<br>&gt; &gt; I&#39;ve no particular attachment to {sorg&#39;e=
tru} but I feel that {balnoltru} is<br>&gt; &gt; too restrictive, a &quot;b=
ig kingdom&quot; is not an empire since an empire is made<br>
&gt; &gt; by more nations (that might have different languages and cultures=
 and even<br>&gt; &gt; have a king that is subject to the emperor).<br>&gt;=
<br>&gt; Both words are good. The Japanese Emperor cu balnoltru jenai sorgu=
&#39;etru; the<br>
&gt; government of the EU cu sorgu&#39;etru jenai balnoltru. An emperor in =
one of the<br>&gt; ancient empires could be both.<br>&gt;<br><br></div>I th=
ink we should make a distinction between an empire (one dominant state<br>
ruling a number of lesser states acquired by conquest, marriage or whatever=
)<br>and a union of the EU type (several &#39;equal&#39; states voluntarily=
 bound together<br>and governed by a mutually agreed body).=A0 For me the l=
atter would be<br>
{sorgugje&#39;a} but not the former.<br><br>totus<br><br><br><br></blockquo=
te></div><br></div>

--0016363b8efcc735fa0498b8073a--