From lojbab@lojban.org Wed Aug 01 10:30:05 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Wed, 01 Aug 2007 10:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eastrmmtao107.cox.net ([68.230.240.59]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IGI1I-0000N5-Hk for llg-members@lojban.org; Wed, 01 Aug 2007 10:30:04 -0700 Received: from eastrmimpo01.cox.net ([68.1.16.119]) by eastrmmtao107.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20070801172953.CLEN1348.eastrmmtao107.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2007 13:29:53 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([72.192.234.183]) by eastrmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id WhVq1X00c3y5FKc0000000; Wed, 01 Aug 2007 13:29:53 -0400 Message-ID: <46B0C30A.2030800@lojban.org> Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 13:29:46 -0400 From: Bob LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: llg-members@lojban.org Subject: [llg-members] Re: Create Lojban geocaching coins? References: <46AFD145.7020902@lojban.org> <200708011115.54956.phma@phma.optus.nu> <925d17560708010849h4d95c8f4x7a0fd1a6a0601ba8@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <925d17560708010849h4d95c8f4x7a0fd1a6a0601ba8@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 309 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members Jorge Llambías wrote: > On 8/1/07, Pierre Abbat wrote: > >>On Tuesday 31 July 2007 20:18, Bob LeChevalier wrote: >> >>>Nora suggests that we put a large "bi" on one side and "zo'o'o .e lo >>>botpi be lo xalka" on the other, but she says that this isn't a serious >>>suggestion. >> >>Shouldn't that be "jikru"? Or is there a more specific word? > > {jikru} makes more sense. I agree. Though you have to excuse Nora, who as a non-drinker doesn't have a clear distinction between distilled spirits and any other kind. > Also, {.e lo botpi be lo xalka} is not a grammatical fragment, although > perhaps it should be made grammatical given that it seems to be a > popular mistake. I've seen things like {to .e ko'a toi} a few times. I'm not sure whether this is necessary, or whether it is malglico colloquialism leaking across that we ought to be fighting. Of course it is "bad English" to start a sentence with "and", but we do it anyway. And we continue the sentences of others using "and". I certainly wouldn't fight such a change, but I suspect that it would need to be any sort of logical connective and whatever the following connectand is, at any grammatical level, that needs to be legalized. > Also, if you're coining a new cmavo for "yo ho ho", why {zo'o'o} > rather than {io'o'o}? It can't be an extension of {zo'o} because > "yo ho ho" is not a mark of humor. Probably not, but in Nora's case she was decidedly making a joke, and the zo'o'o reflected that fact. One would have to decide exactly what the "yo ho ho" is expressing, and I suspect one could easily come up with an existing combination of emotive attitudinals that would express it. > I was able to track down "yo ho ho and a bottle of rum", but where > does the {bi} come from? "pieces of eight" %^) According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_dollar it was the Spanish 8 reales coin that was the closest thing to an international monetary unit in the time of heyday of the pirates (during the Spanish colonial era). The peso and the dollar and other currencies were based on this coin as the fundamental unit. Pieces of eight were often physically cut into 8 pieces (called 8 "bits") which is why an American quarter is colloquially "2 bits" lojbab