Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 22:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Spheniscine <spheniscine@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <2c247ae2-1e2b-446f-906e-d48a75271b77@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [lojban] New metalinguistic term since the cmevla-brivla merge?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_3973_740015928.1431236357047"
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: -1.7
X-Spam_score_int: -16
X-Spam_bar: -

------=_Part_3973_740015928.1431236357047
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_3974_1369902119.1431236357047"

------=_Part_3974_1369902119.1431236357047
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

If the cmevla and brivla have been syntactically merged, as implemented by 
the ilmentufa-parser, I believe the terms must now be redefined.

{cmevla} could remain as is; they still end in a consonant, have mandatory 
pauses before and after, and are primarily used for names.

As for {brivla}, I believe {lo cmevla ca brivla}. What is used to be known 
as "Stage 2 fu'ivla" can now be just cmevla; for example, I could say:

{ti .fetutcinis.} (This is fettucine), or {mi citka lo .fetutcinis.} (I eat 
some fettucine)

In those examples, the cmevla have been divorced from their usual role of 
"proper nouns", and are basically used the same way a gismu, lujvo, or a 
zi'evla would. Additionally, they're dead easy to use; any beginner who's 
been taught how to reformat their name into a cmevla can use tthese.

Of course, like stage-2 fu'ivla before it, this is meant to be only a 
temporary measure; there are two good reasons to "naturalize" any useful 
concepts into a lujvo or zi'evla:

   1. Avoidance of the mandatory pauses; too many cmevla in text will 
   inhibit natural reading.
   2. The possibility of rigorous definition in resources like jbovlaste, 
   with defined place values; as per the goals of Lojban, each {na'e cmevla 
   brivla} should represent one single concept, and polysemy avoided.

And... yeah. So now we just had a demonstration of the problem: we need a 
new word for {na'e cmevla brivla}, which differs from {cmevla} both in 
morphology and in having a rigorously defined place structure. It is the 
union of the sets {gismu}, {lujvo}, and {zi'evla}. What should it be?

{kauvla}? {mulvla}? {rarvla}? Or something else entirely?

-- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

------=_Part_3974_1369902119.1431236357047
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">If the cmevla and brivla have been syntactically merged, a=
s implemented by the ilmentufa-parser, I believe the terms must now be rede=
fined.<div><br></div><div>{cmevla} could remain as is; they still end in a =
consonant, have mandatory pauses before and after, and are primarily used f=
or names.</div><div><br></div><div>As for {brivla}, I believe {lo cmevla ca=
 brivla}. What is used to be known as "Stage 2 fu'ivla" can now be just cme=
vla; for example, I could say:</div><div><br></div><div>{ti .fetutcinis.} (=
This is fettucine), or {mi citka lo .fetutcinis.} (I eat some fettucine)</d=
iv><div><br></div><div>In those examples, the cmevla have been divorced fro=
m their usual role of "proper nouns", and are basically used the same way a=
 gismu, lujvo, or a zi'evla would. Additionally, they're dead easy to use; =
any beginner who's been taught how to reformat their name into a cmevla can=
 use tthese.</div><div><br></div><div>Of course, like stage-2 fu'ivla befor=
e it, this is meant to be only a temporary measure; there are two good reas=
ons to "naturalize" any useful concepts into a lujvo or zi'evla:</div><div>=
<ol><li><span style=3D"line-height: normal;">Avoidance of the mandatory pau=
ses; too many cmevla in text will inhibit natural reading.</span></li><li><=
span style=3D"line-height: normal;">The possibility of rigorous definition =
in resources like jbovlaste, with defined place values; as per the goals of=
 Lojban, each {na'e cmevla brivla} should represent one single concept, and=
 polysemy avoided.</span></li></ol><div>And... yeah. So now we just had a d=
emonstration of the problem: we need a new word for {na'e cmevla brivla}, w=
hich differs from {cmevla} both in morphology and in having a rigorously de=
fined place structure. It is the union of the sets {gismu}, {lujvo}, and {z=
i'evla}. What should it be?</div></div><div><br></div><div>{kauvla}? {mulvl=
a}? {rarvla}? Or something else entirely?</div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

------=_Part_3974_1369902119.1431236357047--
------=_Part_3973_740015928.1431236357047--