Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 85.13.138.119 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of me@v4hn.de) client-ip=85.13.138.119;
Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 23:15:35 +0200
From: v4hn <me@v4hn.de>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] cmevla as a class of brivla
Message-ID: <20130530211535.GT3114@samsa.fritz.box>
References: <CAHxnAmJvBZ1_4S1OF45n3dd5g2iQmFEGiQbsyBTN6PwybsNkrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <51A379EF.3020803@gmx.de>
 <CAHxnAm+HZGvy=Ck9nvogsR_uHL=+BYPho6vDKe8WGp-H4xKmEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <51A6685C.3010505@lojban.org>
 <CAMKwHj3gpou-t-6wPOLP7TCXdGhVGU2z+H-z4g=yGJK8Yg2gEg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHxnAmJELwg6ke9jDbOqyoR-f=dy4nK+rENyH609tdOdM1D4jQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHxnAmLDc51aG9_aW49KUaVYZgyY4FeDtKUx=9usU8T9BW7jJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHxnAmLW8b8so=-j-A_P0aHtL-MwH2goo_Jnx=uRpYWzHuxENw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="JNs4m2JFMNhdiK2v"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHxnAmLW8b8so=-j-A_P0aHtL-MwH2goo_Jnx=uRpYWzHuxENw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /


--JNs4m2JFMNhdiK2v
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 08:25:33AM -0400, Betsemes wrote:
> On second thought, tanru have been always vague on interrelating
> semantics; so {lo selpa'i karce} might mean {lo karce pe la selpa'i}
> provided enough context.

No zo'onai
interrelating semantics of the bridi, not of the words.

That's at least my very strong intuition and I ba'e strongly
hope that someone can back me up on this one.

Actually since someone first told me that brivla are allowed
cmene I always disliked even that quite a lot. It's too easy to confuse
these "names" with the bridi meaning. Nothing against you selpa'i,
but you're definitely not my beloved and if e.g. {coi selpa'i} leaves
this open, I'm pretty pissed. Also in NatLangs not having this distinction
can introduce formal ambiguities for colloquial speech (german: "Der Mueller
ist zuverlaessig" - {la OR lo mlopre cu se lacri}).

I strongly agree with la lojbab on that one:
brivla are nicknames, NOT proper names.
If you wish to make them names, use cmene that look similar
or end in non-final rafsi. This still leaves a connotation
but makes it syntactically clear what you are talking about.
No reason to be to lazy to add one 's' to your prefered brivla-name.


mi'e la .van. mu'o

--JNs4m2JFMNhdiK2v
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlGnwXcACgkQMBKLZs4+wjz92wCdFNDxE6eejqNPhzfOVcLigcHV
iEoAn1dPTfWkAe8L6Veje+gAxqd1mjlj
=zdn5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--JNs4m2JFMNhdiK2v--