"Intoxicate", while t= echnically correct, gives a rather the wrong impression. Generally, i= ntoxication is thought of as a relatively pleasant experience, a high, not = (except, perhaps, in the very long run) a dangerous one. {vindu} is p= retty clearly meant to refer to something dangerous in the short run and th= oroughly unpleasant, hence both "poison" and "venomous" and, indeed, "toxic= " -- yew leaves, say. I'd stick with "poison" in the English.

From: la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 9:36 AM
Subject: [lojban] Re: Noun-ness of {v= indu}

On Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:17:28 PM UT= C+4, tsani wrote:

coi<= div>

{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 o= n 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 "= 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_o= ut.