http://dag.githu= b.com/cll/4/4/

and what you see as _pointless_ can be seen as quite _relevant_ depend= ing on what you WANT...
bottom line, is: you could break any language i= n zeros and ones, and there is no=A0definitive reason to put these u= nits in bigger packs, as human beings tend to do (we don't think or tal= k only with 0 and 1).
Off course, you might feel that in general it is less _pointless_ trying to= get closer to such a language (made only of 0 and 1)...

2011/12/25 tsani nicte <nictytan@gmail.com>

It just seems to me like there are a lot of = _pointless_ gismu that are simply in reality semantic variations of another= gismu.
It's true that we want to consider "making love" and "ra= pe" to be different, and in fact, the particular distinction is achiev= ed through

lujvo, not through entirely different gismu. Also, I believed that the= six source languages were only used in determining the=A0
sounds= used in making the gismu. What deserved a gismu and what did not was rathe= r arbitrary, if I recall correctly. This is why we

have gismu such as "nikle" and "rozgu" which simpl= y don't deserve gismu at all. (These are leftover from Loglan, I believ= e.)

I think that the size of the gimste could be e= ffectively reduced if we dropped all these agentive/non-agentive and polar = opposite gismu.

Otherwise, what's really preventing surgau from having its own gis= mu? or, for that matter, any lujvo at all?

On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 2:55 PM, ianek <janek37= @gmail.com> wrote:

There are more such cases, like {zdani} and = {xabju} - as I see it,
it's the same relation, only different order of arguments.

mu'o mi'e ianek

On 25 Gru, 16:00, david demartin <davidandresloque...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> my guess is that the 6 or so languages used to find common words = as base
> for gismu had all distinct terms for fast/slow... (as opposed to
> fast/non-fast).
> ...and we might indeed want to make THAT kind of a difference between<= br> > killing and dying for example... a little bit like we want to distingu= ish
> between "making love" and "raping": although one i= s just a slight variation
> of the other, we kind of WANT to consider them different things altoge= ther
> (as to assign them very different terms).
>
> dyabudy
>

> 2011/12/25 tsani nicte <nicty...@gmail.com>

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > How come the gimste has somtimes a different gismu that's sim= ply defined
> > as the polar opposite of another? Why not just use to'e?
> > The example that comes to mind is: sutra vs masno
>
> > Conversely, I once saw a like of gismu that had both agentive and=
> > non-agentive versions. Why not just use -gau lujvo?
> > The example that comes to mind is: catra vs morsi
>
> > mu'o mi'e tan
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Googl= e Groups
> > "lojban" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n?hl=3Den.