Received: from mail-ie0-f189.google.com ([209.85.223.189]:57413) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UIgbL-0000BT-07; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 07:36:28 -0700 Received: by mail-ie0-f189.google.com with SMTP id a11sf287025iee.26 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 07:36:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:date:from:to:message-id :in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender :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=Y4okG6UqBAtNUsYojkHIdA0N8AjRW2OHJQldWwVOoIQ=; b=xryqNNxoSlz0XLghuDcJHvK3XcnBgfTMLmnUz7EYFKYB/A5oq0+W+DYp1YJGReREe3 Xs2FfS4YQtMN+XhgslnStMRDCqVtIxMpabUYZTTSCLV3fUC0VxS3gxNYPrKe3B51lSf2 994cMEqmG228uZnLhIfgFlstU6XBj7WqV+tFMTC9URdzrVXtDrjDs7pKuO2Nn9ajFc9J 2mZgdZsL+4lLy9izKo+aezyyTaRcmLU+fufK10TdSFs8FScJ2PZHxVbVfNLeBrp4adsN hNbri9ciuvoQlUcDELe6zP127gJ7nEYjCeWlffgEwIuVV9dXkhxrUrhOMv0dI3tfudKj l5Gg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:date:from:to:message-id :in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender :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=Y4okG6UqBAtNUsYojkHIdA0N8AjRW2OHJQldWwVOoIQ=; b=huaNqsZrSZU/afsrYX4CgVu/pWbmT6H24WGrrSGdsJbXmlYs+15gWAgausqPb6XuAR 3BPba5acVw8a7CbkCzMbjCOodFK4Tnz5CYds6jOVtZeawsGIYuYLYzXcT1jMVM92tOFH DhxIrZtey+OWuEZXpaTe0uE5o5cCGp4NO34Z55UaN2A+LSlMrJwZb4qijK2Ugg874h5g 3iz1jmD4ptYrEHbs9jVgO6nn63iVmCb2I1y0nGyyK95uQUof7cDDtf1mBMFNSWtXRd7j iCCn8WBDlYXneWb2+3/vppztD0wJS+703dsGI7f+MIcJY1zHNFF25zebH8KWgEXwRElc EP1w== X-Received: by 10.50.33.175 with SMTP id s15mr509866igi.8.1363876563069; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.214.68 with SMTP id ny4ls1744483igc.36.gmail; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 07:36:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.43.225 with SMTP id z1mr369734igl.15.1363876561967; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 07:36:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 07:36:00 -0700 (PDT) From: la gleki To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [lojban] Re: Noun-ness of {vindu} MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@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="----=_Part_141_864242.1363876560287" X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / ------=_Part_141_864242.1363876560287 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:17:28 PM UTC+4, tsani wrote: > > coi > > {vindu} as written in the gimste appears extremely noun-ish, and seems to > implicitly contain a {ka'e}, which I find undesirable. If the definition > were reworded to make it seem more "active", then tacking on ka'e (or -ka'e > in a lujvo) would produce the current definition, which is more flexible. > > Current definition: > vindu = x1 is poisonous/venomous/toxic/a toxin to x2. > > Suggested definition: > vindu = x1 intoxicates/is a toxin affecting x2. > vindu is something that is capable (kakne) of intoxicating an organism (x2) under normal circumstances (e.g. the lack of antidote in it). > Also, are toxins intrinsically related to their effects? Can we say that > something is a toxin if it *does nothing*? I'd also suggest throwing in an > x3, a property of the x2, which is the effect of the toxin. The structure > of this new vindu is thus parallel to {xajmi}. > > Furthermore, {vindu} as defined makes it seem to have an unnecessarily > negative connotation. I feel that this word could be far more useful and > flexible if made a bit more general, along the lines of "x1 is a > substance/chemical unnaturally present/not normally in such levels in x2 > with effects x3." > > If {vindu} is more active, then it can be used to construct lujvo for > inebriation and use of other substances such as marijuana: {xalselvindu}, > {marnyselvindu}. > This lujvo would equally include the effect place and would typically have > the structure: "rodyselvindu = x1 does (intention-agnostic) x2 (ka) under > the influence of substance broda". > > The old definition of {vindu} is achieved with {vidyka'e}, "x1 is a > toxin/poison to x2 with potential effect(s) x3." > > .i mi'e la tsani mu'o > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. ------=_Part_141_864242.1363876560287 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:17:28 PM UTC+4, tsani wrote:coi

{vindu} as writt= en in the gimste appears extremely noun-ish, and seems to implicitly contai= n a {ka'e}, which I find undesirable. If the definition were reworded to ma= ke it seem more "active", then tacking on ka'e (or -ka'e in a lujvo) would = produce the current definition, which is more flexible.

Current definition:
vindu =3D x1 is poisonous= /venomous/toxic/a toxin to x2.

Suggested definitio= n:
vindu =3D x1 intoxicates/is a toxin affecting x2.

vindu is something that is capable (kakne) of int= oxicating an organism (x2) under normal circumstances (e.g. the lack of ant= idote in it).


Also, are toxins intrinsically related to their effects? Can we = say that something is a toxin if it *does nothing*? I'd also suggest throwi= ng in an x3, a property of the x2, which is the effect of the toxin. The st= ructure of this new vindu is thus parallel to {xajmi}.

Furthermore, {vindu} as defined makes it seem  to = have an unnecessarily negative connotation. I feel that this word could be = far more useful and flexible if made a bit more general, along the lines of= "x1 is a substance/chemical unnaturally present/not normally in such level= s in x2 with effects x3."

If {vindu} is more active, then it can be used to const= ruct lujvo for inebriation and use of other substances such as marijuana: {= xalselvindu}, {marnyselvindu}.
This lujvo would equally include t= he effect place and would typically have the structure: "rodyselvindu =3D x= 1 does (intention-agnostic) x2 (ka) under the influence of substance broda"= .

The old definition of {vindu} is achieved with {vidyka'= e}, "x1 is a toxin/poison to x2 with potential effect(s) x3."
.i mi'e la tsani mu'o

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 
------=_Part_141_864242.1363876560287--