Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of betsemes@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c03::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c03::22f;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <51A379EF.3020803@gmx.de>
References: <CAHxnAmJvBZ1_4S1OF45n3dd5g2iQmFEGiQbsyBTN6PwybsNkrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<51A379EF.3020803@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 12:00:28 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHxnAm+HZGvy=Ck9nvogsR_uHL=+BYPho6vDKe8WGp-H4xKmEA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] cmevla as a class of brivla
From: Betsemes <betsemes@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:21 AM, selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de> wrote:
> For me, the Merge is actually even more important than the GIJA reform.

This is a topic that has frustrated me to no end since the beginning.
By the time of the quoted thread where Robin said the system was not
broken, I had no argument to counter, yet the topic has haunted me
every single time I come back to Lojban.

> It'd be nice to hear what others think, but my hopes aren't too high,
> although realistically I feel it's inevitable in the long run. Off the top
> of my head, I know of around 5 people who are in favor (excluding xorxes),
> and the current authorities all seem opposed.

I've been recently thinking a lot on a fictional lojban-talking world,
and the topic of naming is one I had to deal with. I concluded the
system is broken for those countries where two surnames are used to
name an individual.

Let me take some cmevla and brivla used as names within this list.

betsemes
solvor
camgusmis
xorxes

arxokuna
selpa'i
gleki
tsani

That's enough. Now the following are ficticious examples, not the real
people that are using those names. Bear that in mind.

Let's say "la betsemes solvor" wants to marry "la xorxes camgusmis". A
child may be called "la rod solvor camgusmis", name: rod, first
surname: solvor, second surname: camgusmis. That naming system is what
is being used in my country.

Let's say "la gleki arxokuna" marries "la selpa'i tsani". No problem
either. A child may be named "la broda arxokuna tsani". No problem.

But what happens whether "la betsemes solvor" wants to marry "la
selpa'i tsani"? Oops. What should we do with them? Do we forbid them
to marry because the child's name violates the language naming rules?

They should be allowed to marry and name their child "la rod solvor
tsani" or "la broda solvor tsani" if they wish. If the language does
not support this naming system, is not the fault of the country's
naming system. It means the language naming system is broken.

mu'o mi'e betsemes

-- 
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.