From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Aug 10 09:22:45 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:22:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IJXG8-0007Vj-Cd for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:22:44 -0700 Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.134.184]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IJXG1-0007VV-JG for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:22:44 -0700 Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i10so1133214mue for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:22:35 -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=pmXl9+v9tG+9gdDYivK+ej5dn9jMAhXXK/QiZzEp2dcfyPrZ0vlWaNgLzMQzUc4PVrQ5I0GpllGve+EH1x/tPGMVVvSY8SX0zxmf4uvbGSwP2rweiaXsE7BNFPy+KdtjSq1/hkFht7BhAIyRqYRbLwxjv95Mhvm3ZBGnh5CQJEQ= 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=R0miAmOjZSCFRlz2jfrJmbtilDEpWkkKCw1o2C+j3H5qGBZW+J3PO8i/CCLL6X0UjaBdANnDDoVBtXfxfVXGTGUSUNiPScvyFUoZNKG4EZNa3V+g6EaxMi1oTiN1PNm/mPzXhV0CfFyfNhB9tn9N2PyZ/o6TYfT0TNm3BMEL1jY= Received: by 10.86.65.11 with SMTP id n11mr2469318fga.1186762954309; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:22:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.86.27.19 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:22:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d17560708100922k6d111266o50236ff063bdc189@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:22:34 -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: <46BC81B9.8090002@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> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 5334 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 8/10/07, 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. > > Two examples from the book: > kosta degji - coat-finger -> sleeve of a coat > and any use of degji to metaphorically indicate a peninsula. Are you saying that: le vi kosta cu dukse clani lo ka degji la floridas cu degji le mergu'e are incorrect uses of {degji}? If they are proper uses of {degji}, then {tumla degji} and {kosta degji} both are types of {degji}. > 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? 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). > cifnu-degji - baby finger > This is a kind of finger. But it has nothing to do with babies. It is > using a metaphorical aspect of a baby as the meaning modifier. Which is not really relevant to whether a broda brode has to be a brode. mu'o mi'e xorxes