From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Wed Aug 15 06:31:58 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1ILIyX-0002fu-0l for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:31:58 -0700 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.187]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1ILIyQ-0002fX-Bx for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:31:51 -0700 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 4so762978nfv for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:31:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=i4KkMZ7qh8nRWRxwIG4GtzrhsRcEGsJiKBGiAMXExCwN5LC325/5k/XNnS2W1nTdr53ug60zDfoWfkMJmLYe7M6Oo7NIMvzUP30S9KAhcDWXxlHKTK9hRe45MGQ5/5+E7cSKD07oNB5TFlP++8qnpr+vaNm4py42G9v++oTkEA8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=CS2eJyfpX7ewnTOXbHEGZHEZfXTbYziE9W9RuvQgnREZ4VKhieyAVIcqHxKHHNAEfbnLI9LDBei4ZPC1jNiSikGaCOslkNpZEWOlSrUw/0JPSpm7LAydd/w3e+kLqFNnYY9CglWY1yhAhTq45EoEmMUAY0SawtdiIV5PWxyYjCc= Received: by 10.86.1.1 with SMTP id 1mr440751fga.1187184700061; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:31:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.86.27.19 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:31:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d17560708150631q439ad77cr939d47c767988ac4@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:31:40 -0300 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant In-Reply-To: <46C2F02C.4000105@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <46BBDB4D.6020401@lojban.org> <398993.4184.qm@web56403.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <925d17560708100554m6232d274ua912df386fd715b7@mail.gmail.com> <46BC6554.7080409@lojban.org> <925d17560708100638n2ed68814q94f8d9c2f4e5ebf1@mail.gmail.com> <46BC81B9.8090002@lojban.org> <925d17560708100922k6d111266o50236ff063bdc189@mail.gmail.com> <46C2F02C.4000105@lojban.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 5371 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On 8/15/07, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > > > >>1. There are other kinds of modification besides "type of" > >> > >>2. The place structure may be the same, but arguably the semantics may > >>be different. > > A "kosta degji" is > a type of degji, but I would feel it to be a stretch to say that it is a > "kosta type of degji". Rather it is a kind of degji having something to > do with a kosta. OK, I completely misunderstood what you were saying then. Similarly, {cinfo kalte} is usually also not a "lion type of hunter"? i.e. it is usually not a {cinfo je kalte} but a {kalte be lo cinfo}. > >>It is a finger only as a metaphorical stretch. You may be able to fill > >>in a meaningful place for each of the places of degji, but it is a > >>strain to use this as a tanru. > > > > More of a strain than using it as a simple selbri? > > You mean "brivla" I hope, since a tanru is a simple selbri. No, I meant a single-word selbri, as opposed to a multiple-word selbri such as a tanru. A brivla is a kind of word, not a way of using a word. A brivla can be used as a single-word selbri, but also as part of a tanru, so "using it as a brivla" would make no sense here. {degji} always remains a brivla, no matter how it is used. > Coining > brivla is not nearly such a strain because one does not have to worry > about the appropriateness of all the places of the modified term. There is no coining of a brivla involved here. I mean using the gismu {degji} as is, without modification, as a single-word selbri. That use can be as metaphoric as when using it as part of a tanru. > > If not, then > > tanru has nothing to do with it. Metaphors don't need to be > > tanru and tanru don't need to be metaphors (the conflation > > of "tanru" with "metaphor" is another case of Lojbanic mixed-up > > terminology). > > tanru is conflated with one kind of metaphor, what we eventually called > a "binary metaphor". But not all tanru are metaphors. There are things that are both tanru and metaphors. There are things that are tanru but not metaphors. There are things that are metaphors but not tanru. There are things that are neither tanru nor metaphors. That's similar to "green" and "car": There are things that are both car and green. There are things that are car but not green. There are things that are green but not car. There are things that are neither car nor green. Using "green" as a keyword for "car", just because there are some green cars, would be silly. Using "metaphor" or "binary metaphor" as a keyword for "tanru", just because some tanru can be metaphoric, is about as silly. Perhaps if most cars, or the typical car, were green, it would make some sense to use "green" as a keyword. Perhaps if most tanru, or the typical tanru, were metaphoric, it would make some sense to use "metaphor" as a keyword for tanru. But that's not really the case, most tanru are not metaphoric. A tanru is simply a type of selbri composed of two (or more) brivla (or other tanru-units), one modifying the other. The tanru, or its component brivla, may be used metaphorically or literally, normally they are used literally. mu'o mi'e xorxes