From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon May 21 00:13:30 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 21 May 2007 00:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hq25B-0002HP-8s for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 00:13:29 -0700 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.233]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hq257-0002HG-Uc for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 00:13:28 -0700 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id h27so5718wxd for ; Mon, 21 May 2007 00:13:19 -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:references; b=dkU+68wKPouVbkkybZlHLzy7FAgfnBpbZzUyOBOlXxJxqeuWl14PeuoWBW4OPc7XtV4Ccdy499rrRPxTaz6zJOAwRJy67pBGVARRPE7pXGET+ZXx12Hy2Mfl96gzokuQ6NxRxjnYATBEBd8FRsajl4igtw+6/Ex2nos8vtntn3M= 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:references; b=BFFnoEy1e7cT96aaG84z5UZZOzhckxRPwsY/gXaUgeQiLJtHdXX83ZYJYuLBRMzhKhbIZItVGxoGIHKc8mPT3p5mTajpSZypa3qmCRaD2YQ+sgya5s+Ea0G/bsrgm+FHh5mXh+8PuE38n+LTG5Yo1QH36LLXLZberSxsTuu3E2s= Received: by 10.70.42.16 with SMTP id p16mr5590221wxp.1179731599337; Mon, 21 May 2007 00:13:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.9.19 with HTTP; Mon, 21 May 2007 00:13:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2f91285f0705210013j76627dc5k4939dd7e7e994d70@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 08:13:19 +0100 From: "Vid Sintef" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: distinction between gismu & cmav In-Reply-To: <419009.65918.qm@web56411.mail.re3.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_46461_27495442.1179731599259" References: <2f91285f0705201557o75faa50avf0eaedd5f309881@mail.gmail.com> <419009.65918.qm@web56411.mail.re3.yahoo.com> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 4558 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: picos.picos@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners ------=_Part_46461_27495442.1179731599259 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline I've come to understand. Thank you. By the way, will there in the future be some addition or clearance of rafsi on the list? I've heard that the listing is still tentative and (someday when a proper Lojban dictionary is edited) may be changed in accordance wit= h speakers' actual usage. I wonder, for instance, what's a rafsi for {damri}, which is currently non-existent? It's said that the number of rafsi assigne= d to a gismu depends on the word's usefulness; but shouldn't {damri} be quite productive and worthwhile, considering those numerous types of drum instruments in the world? vid On 5/21/07, Nathaniel Krause wrote: > > *Vid Sintef * wrote: > > Isn't an affix something to be "added" to a base word and alter its > original grammatical nature (like the English "-er" in "longer" or the Cz= ech > "nej-" in " nejhor=9A=ED" or the Japanese "sa-" in "samayou")? If it is t= hat > rafsi are to be "joined" together to make longer words, mustn't they be > certain "root" words themselves from which that resulting longer words' > meanings would derive, possessing proper semantic essences even though th= ey > are not to be spoken as single words. > > A rafsi is not a word. If you say try to say a rafsi by itself, it means > something else. For instance, "-coi-" is a rafsi which means "deep", but,= if > you say "coi" by itself, it means "hello". "coitca" is a lujvo meaning, > perhaps, "deep city", but you can't use "coi" and "tca" separately with t= he > same meanings. > > If it is a convention to not use rafsi individually, still that doesn't > stop them from possessing the nature of base words. You said gismu are "r= oot > words" because they are the roots of meaning; rafsi too are the roots of > meaning, aren't they? If not, how could we possibly read the meaning of a > lujvo which are made from rafsi? rafsi have meanings by themselves, and > therefore they are words. > > Rafsi are the roots of meaning, but they are not root words because they > are not words. They do not have meaning by themselves. It is not simply a > convention which prevents rafsi from being used in isolation. > > Cheers, > > mi'e .sen. > > ------------------------------ > Don't pick lemons. > See all the new 2007 carsat Yahoo! > Autos. > > ------=_Part_46461_27495442.1179731599259 Content-Type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline I've come to understand. Thank you.

By the way, will there in th= e future be some addition or clearance of rafsi on the list? I've heard= that the listing is still tentative and (someday when a proper Lojban dict= ionary is edited) may be changed in accordance with speakers' actual us= age. I wonder, for instance, what's a rafsi for {damri}, which is curre= ntly non-existent? It's said that the number of rafsi assigned to a gis= mu depends on the word's usefulness; but shouldn't {damri} be quite= productive and worthwhile, considering those numerous types of drum instru= ments in the world?

vid


On 5/21/07, Nathaniel Krause <nathanielkrause@yahoo.com> wrote: Vid Sintef <picos.picos@g= mail.com> wrote:
Isn't an affix something to be "added" to a base wo= rd and alter its original grammatical nature (like the English "-er&qu= ot; in "longer" or the Czech "nej-" in " nejhor=9A=ED" or the Japanese "sa-" in "samayou")? If it is that rafsi are to be "joined" together to make l= onger words, mustn't they be certain "root" words themselves = from which that resulting longer words' meanings would derive, possessi= ng proper semantic essences even though they are not to be spoken as single= words.=20
A rafsi is not a word. If you say try to say a= rafsi by itself, it means something else. For instance, "-coi-" = is a rafsi which means "deep", but, if you say "coi" by= itself, it means "hello". "coitca" is a lujvo meaning,= perhaps, "deep city", but you can't use "coi" and "tca" separately with the same meanings.

If it is a convention to not use rafsi individually, sti= ll that doesn't stop them from possessing the nature of base words. You= said gismu are "root words" because they are the roots of meanin= g; rafsi =20 too are the roots of meaning, ar= en't they? If not, how could we possibly read the meaning of a lujvo wh= ich are made from rafsi? rafsi have meanings by themselves, and therefore they are words.
Rafsi are th= e roots of meaning, but they are not root words because they are not words.= They do not have meaning by themselves. It is not simply a convention whic= h prevents rafsi from being used in isolation.

Cheers,

mi'e .sen.

=20

Don't pick lemons.
See all the new 2007 cars= at Yahoo! Autos.

<= /p>


------=_Part_46461_27495442.1179731599259--