Received: from mail-oi0-f64.google.com ([209.85.218.64]:33929) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1YrLbQ-00037s-7Z for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 10 May 2015 00:24:48 -0700 Received: by oiax69 with SMTP id x69sf28432640oia.1 for ; Sun, 10 May 2015 00:24:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :content-type:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=8AD1ZdHAipxMf2HmRIubFhZfCDdzpfyCfa22u2Sa56g=; b=dRuZkBNxyoEilR6u2lGTUOwi2weoUE/+nuJ27gTa3iCh2PBgnbW4Zrm3iWluD/wwsk 4RdwgziBAMjdBzZzHOecOvYEWv2EESqYhqMEpb2Mas0/Gksqt/9bsi/Ieo8oSQTlDD8P l6Qw9VCEQxZwpyHphsw6dcFOlc6H99Ya8z2gwcma39s3f/CPt3ESkkLJY4tCQG0Z6EhA S7cMwMjTufhtWc1IWrJOMTTbcFSFnafdzfjk1GfNvf9wgODAhUy9GA1Bs1VSOTNBVskF 60ElNrbySMzIoqboQ/VJ6vT/kZsPexPgMrxKgEbBt9pshOxC6kvrP9YIEhQx/HSNEeHh tAZQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :content-type:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=8AD1ZdHAipxMf2HmRIubFhZfCDdzpfyCfa22u2Sa56g=; b=fYfsO7JkQsiPPZn3KFmwEJ5KvbJUT+4cQ6IASjQeNO+YjTHadOhygggXlASLvJuTXg AEjFOiA24QuciMnKhHSy+n9VDvFRUASBKwKjRFJmiMFRlfB6ipPHR6oLKF/qPuFumd76 sxdiQSteCtCWtlGVsOe0BWQsHjeCB9OACu0sPCm1/z9ZnGLo0gJeZtzqxGYDiO/Dxc/c RaJ3MYgLNJ33wPDoGo6iAxvHKDriuTXiRPoCFC1fLw31dBWY9QEgrd1t57glDs3nLZxT Lwnd4RO/2e5P79aDjX2SXHltfuTuZMW4yX++TwIfX/n5C+4N+DQFhYfi+TNK0zl1al9y iNeA== X-Received: by 10.50.109.137 with SMTP id hs9mr98158igb.1.1431242678244; Sun, 10 May 2015 00:24:38 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.129.65 with SMTP id nu1ls683885igb.40.gmail; Sun, 10 May 2015 00:24:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.82.8 with SMTP id e8mr119462igy.7.1431242677995; Sun, 10 May 2015 00:24:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 00:24:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Spheniscine To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <2c247ae2-1e2b-446f-906e-d48a75271b77@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] New metalinguistic term since the cmevla-brivla merge? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_3849_1962590332.1431242676604" X-Original-Sender: spheniscine@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: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_bar: - ------=_Part_3849_1962590332.1431242676604 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3850_2054375651.1431242676605" ------=_Part_3850_2054375651.1431242676605 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 fau'u ru'e I didn't know about the difference between the "experimental" ilmentufa parser (which implemented the merge) and the "official" ilmentufa parser (which hasn't yet) I'm not too familiar about the discussed pros and cons of the merge, but I think the simplification of the vocabulary expansion process (another on the pro side is the abilities of la-names to mix cmevla with za'e mulvla) is worth a few more mandatory s, whose elision tends to confuse beginners anyway. (I think it's a bit more natural to drop them after pro-sumti without forgetting it when it is mandatory, but dropping them after cmevla might; I could be wrong though, as I have been AWOL for a while) On Sunday, May 10, 2015 at 3:04:54 PM UTC+8, remod wrote: > > My understanding is that "merging" cmevla and brivla was rejected on the > basis that it would have broken a significant part of the grammar. > > {la lojban mo}, would no longer mean "what is lojban" (or similar). > > The way to transform a cmevla into a brivla is by using {me la} ( {lo mela > diplodocus cu barda} ) > > Did I miss the merge and the necessary changes to the grammar? > > > > On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Spheniscine > wrote: > >> 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+un...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- 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_3850_2054375651.1431242676605 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
fau'u ru'e I didn't know about the difference between the = "experimental" ilmentufa parser (which implemented the merge) and the "offi= cial" ilmentufa parser (which hasn't yet)

I'm not too fa= miliar about the discussed pros and cons of the merge, but I think the simp= lification of the vocabulary expansion process (another on the pro side is = the abilities of la-names to mix cmevla with za'e mulvla) is worth a few mo= re mandatory <cu>s, whose elision tends to confuse beginners anyway. = (I think it's a bit more natural to drop them after pro-sumti without forge= tting it when it is mandatory, but dropping them after cmevla might; I coul= d be wrong though, as I have been AWOL for a while)

On Sunday, = May 10, 2015 at 3:04:54 PM UTC+8, remod wrote:
My understanding is th= at "merging" cmevla and brivla was rejected on the basis that it would have= broken a significant part of the grammar.

{la lojban mo}, wo= uld no longer mean "what is lojban" (or similar).

The way to t= ransform a cmevla into a brivla is by using {me la} ( {lo mela diplodocus c= u barda} )

Did I miss the merge and the necessary changes to t= he grammar?



On S= un, May 10, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Spheniscine <sphen...@gmail.com> wrote:
If the cmevla = and brivla have been syntactically merged, as implemented by the ilmentufa-= parser, I believe the terms must now be redefined.

{cmev= la} could remain as is; they still end in a consonant, have mandatory pause= s before and after, and are primarily used for names.

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

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

In those= examples, the cmevla have been divorced from their usual role of "proper n= ouns", and are basically used the same way a gismu, lujvo, or a zi'evla wou= ld. 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 d= efined 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 nee= d 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 un= ion of the sets {gismu}, {lujvo}, and {zi'evla}. What should it be?

{kauvla}? {mulvla}? {rarvla}? Or something else ent= irely?

--
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+un...@= googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/l= ojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
------=_Part_3850_2054375651.1431242676605-- ------=_Part_3849_1962590332.1431242676604--