From xod@thestonecutters.net Fri Aug 13 08:39:06 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:39:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thestonecutters.net ([63.251.19.112] helo=chert.thestonecutters.net) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bve8l-0001AE-Gj for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:38:48 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p78-77.acedsl.com [66.114.78.77]) by chert.thestonecutters.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4828E148001 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:15:35 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <411CE083.3070909@thestonecutters.net> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:38:43 -0400 From: xod User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.2 (Windows/20040707) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: only one lujvo per concept? References: <149.307305fd.2e4d48f7@wmconnect.com> <20040812223150.GM30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> In-Reply-To: <20040812223150.GM30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed X-archive-position: 8438 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Robin Lee Powell wrote: >On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 06:28:07PM -0400, MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com >wrote: > > >>In a message dated 2004-08-12 5:21:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >>ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes: >> >> >> >> >>>I don't know whether a lujvo for "software" is better if based on >>>the function of software. In that particular case it might be. But I >>>don't think we can say that in general things are better described >>>by their use-function than by other attributes. >>> >>> >>It sounds to me like there might be a whole range of lujvo for >>"software" (or any other general concept) based on different aspects >>of that concept: use/function/origin/purpose/composition/etc. >> >> > >Yep. Most of use use samru'e or samselpla, depending on whether it's >running or not basically. mutmi'i is also used, but I don't like it >very much (too broad; applies to algorithms as well as code). > > The breadth of a lujvo is whatever we say it is. How does mucti minji cover algorithms more than skami selplatu, or skami pruce? An algorithm is a process; that appears as a keyword in platu, pruce, but not in minji. If you were not a computer geek, why would you think of an application as a "plan/arrangement/plot/[schematic]" or any sort of process? -- Which of the two millionaire Yale Bonesmen do you support? If you believe in an aggressive foreign policy, vote for the one who avoided combat service. If you're against military adventurism, then vote for the man who is proud of his service in an imperialist war.