From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Dec 18 13:49:54 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:49:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NLkhu-000351-It for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:49:54 -0800 Received: from mail-yx0-f202.google.com ([209.85.210.202]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NLkhn-0002z1-N3 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:49:51 -0800 Received: by yxe40 with SMTP id 40so3542197yxe.28 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:49:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=nq2J7l/JmvaDYw/Ae7qLFI3FkRmHovpi3Y2QYiHzucQ=; b=xUg6mhp1sv25qk4IXiHRqL/7eqLHNpPy0n/Hrc2cYZ6Zv0Fw1o/w6abvRjRopYdlgS DUk6czDhxu9kCUv99Cfw6AHN0zmCZsj3saRe20wzoxcQ7Aw//b0NVP1Snxrg2Q5dHyG+ ynfOvvwOs4E5Efrntpi0EqzdPlU3lom2RVidI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rLABHtdUDkMkAxz94dE+u3RyxBnJkP2+6V/GdHWOkoUnbSK2jpFu3PSHIvWHORNei6 gVeSQO104wEYKY0PEIE9T6II0UdOiQtTEG8R+MbRlMIrmlnt6C37Q3sonvPEMAJgM6IH 9Xvc7f/3XWzYjBwHDwzWUIvh9KEJipO7Q+GRE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.101.190.12 with SMTP id s12mr7343248anp.31.1261172981146; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:49:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5a3750120912180545p64d95c2cm969572cf42c406c9@mail.gmail.com> References: <200912172230.29053.phma@phma.optus.nu> <5a3750120912180545p64d95c2cm969572cf42c406c9@mail.gmail.com> From: Christopher Doty Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:49:21 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: A question about gismu definitions To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-archive-position: 2658 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: suomichris@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners I was just looking though the jbovlaste, and it looks like definitions get proposed and voted on by the community? Maybe this is why the definitions seem a bit weird to me... I had previously thought that, as with the grammar and gismu themselves, they were a sort of pre-defined set and not so flexible. Am I understanding this process right? Namely, that I should be flexible in understanding the definitions because they come from different people, and aren't writ in stone? Which brings me to another question: cpina - x1 is pungent/piquant/peppery/spicy/irritating to sense x2 It seems odd to me to have "irritating" in this definition, since it presumes that something spicy or peppery is bad. Wouldn't this sort of opinion about good or bad be better done with attitudinals? .ii le cidja cpina 'Yikes, the food is spicy!' .ui le cidja cpina 'Yay, the food is spicy!' With irritating in this definition, the last one seems to be more like "I'm happy that this food is irritating," which seems an odd thing to say.. Am I missing something here? On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 05:45, Oleksii Melnyk wrote: > You don't need to wait. "remna jenai prenu" is quite common (dead > humans). "prenu ju remna" is rarely distinct, but the difference is > obvious at the start of the Turing test, when you don't know, who is > who. And here are a lot of "us", believing/thinking, that "we" are not > "remna", but some parasites, utilising human bodies — be it "soul" > from a lot of religions, "memes" from Dawkins books. So, we do need > both words right now. Well, I guess if we want to have both things, we run into the problem of making some potentially political decisions. For example, we could take a hint from Klingon, and say that "person" means a being capable of using language; but then it becomes self-defining that, in lojban, great apes are "people." I suppose this is why defining person is such a philosophical question--it just ain't easy!