From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Aug 11 15:50:23 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:50:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv1vB-0004w4-L5 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:50:13 -0700 Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:50:13 -0700 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: The Lojban Wikipedia is up Message-ID: <20040811225013.GN30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <200408080634.18420.phma@phma.hn.org> <200408111625.03899.phma@phma.hn.org> <20040811203139.GB30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <200408111659.13332.phma@phma.hn.org> <20040811210336.GF30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20040811223126.GL30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <411AA1D5.6000109@thestonecutters.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <411AA1D5.6000109@thestonecutters.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 8421 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 06:46:45PM -0400, xod wrote: > Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > >I'm a lot less averse to metaphorical lujvo now that I've created a > >whole bunch of them *complete* *with* *place* *structure*. Doing so > >makes it obvious that Lojban words are more defined by place > >structure than keyword, and that anything that has the place you want > >is The Right Choice. > > > > > > I hear this often, touted as a profound observation, but what does it > mean? That we should pay attention to all the keywords instead of just > one? It means that every single place is important, and that a brivla is a relation between all those things, and that no subset of that can be treated as the whole definition. > >I still think ralcku is asinine, though. mutmi'i I mind a lot less > >than I used to, although I think it's rarely the best choice for > >"software" (too broad). > > Lujvo should focus primarily on use-function -- how it appears to the > user -- as opposed to technical precision. As long as two lujvo are more-or-less the same number of syllables, I *utterly* disagree. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"