Received: from mail-we0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]:45173) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RfImj-00042g-EN; Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:47 -0800 Received: by werm1 with SMTP id m1sf22390125wer.16 for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=mXsl3HK1jf5I9GMRHAPZ6cajwycIN7a8fpImQsV74gg=; b=1K33e6KPDkqUd0AFCG2htTmCyHi5iuME/SzqiH5kzycmhSd6Ihsz03RPiPVy6z11ox jmBhX+hZDedqehnk/G9J0Taul5lQUiIxjor2PIs9Lp2TcOY0tIvpZApmtxyXLDwZSXc7 51jTN0SA+WLyP7Hfhhs4OayECBtpek6Au6Mm0= Received: by 10.216.139.149 with SMTP id c21mr1795817wej.1.1324937553836; Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:33 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.213.102.203 with SMTP id h11ls8669027ebo.3.gmail; Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.14.185.130 with SMTP id u2mr3647162eem.6.1324937552640; Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.14.185.130 with SMTP id u2mr3647161eem.6.1324937552617; Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ey0-f177.google.com (mail-ey0-f177.google.com [209.85.215.177]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i11si16593105eea.0.2011.12.26.14.12.32 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:32 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.177 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.177; Received: by eaai13 with SMTP id i13so5905831eaa.8 for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.205.125.10 with SMTP id gq10mr6436905bkc.11.1324937552482; Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.205.44.199 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:12:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:12:32 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] auntie/uncle From: Michael Turniansky To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: mturniansky@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.177 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=mturniansky@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0ce0b5b42a502f04b506108e X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --000e0ce0b5b42a502f04b506108e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 You can use ckini, if you really want, but I don't know why you object to famti. The x3 makes it general enough. --gejyspa On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Luke Bergen wrote: > So I was visiting the family and was thinking about how my wife's > sisster's daughter would refer to me. > > At first I liked the idea of relationships being explictely called out > like mamymam etc... But now I'm wondering if it would be nice to have a > really generic title for family members. I mean, how many people had an > "uncle jim" who was technically a close friend of the family but has an > honorary family title. > > So I was thinking maybe something like {la lanzu.djim} as being a fully > generic family title for when you don't want to spell out that this is "la > mamymesyspeni djim" > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 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=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 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=en. --000e0ce0b5b42a502f04b506108e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=A0 You can use ckini, if you really want, but I don't= know why you object to famti. =A0The x3 makes it general enough.

<= div>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 --gejyspa

On = Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:<= br>

So I was visiting the family and was thin= king about how my wife's sisster's daughter would refer to me.

At first I liked the idea of relationships being explictely called out l= ike mamymam etc... But now I'm wondering if it would be nice to have a = really generic title for family members.=A0 I mean, how many people had an = "uncle jim" who was technically a close friend of the family but = has an honorary family title.

So I was thinking maybe something like {la lanzu.djim} as being a fully = generic family title for when you don't want to spell out that this is = "la mamymesyspeni djim"

--
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 "= 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/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--000e0ce0b5b42a502f04b506108e--