From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Mon Aug 16 00:22:24 2004
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1Bwbou-0003Rv-KP
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:22:16 -0700
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:22:16 -0700
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: only one lujvo per concept?
Message-ID: <20040816072216.GA10911@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org
References: <149.307305fd.2e4d48f7@wmconnect.com> <20040812223150.GM30673@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <411CE083.3070909@thestonecutters.net> <20040815221840.GB2210@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <41204F78.4070103@thestonecutters.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <41204F78.4070103@thestonecutters.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
X-archive-position: 8457
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 Mon, Aug 16, 2004 at 02:08:56AM -0400, xod wrote:
> Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 11:38:43AM -0400, xod wrote:
> >
> >>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 has nothing to do with computers, for one thing.
> 
> 
> I don't understand this response.
> 
> You complained that " mutmi'i is also used, but I don't like it very
> much (too broad; applies to algorithms as well as code)."
> 
> And I said "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."

Because both of those have 'skami' in them, and algorithms have nothing
to do with skami.

> >>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?
> >
> >Code, and a running program respectively.  mutmi'i is the best I'm
> >aware of for "compiled code that's not actually running", but I've
> >almost never hand to use that.
> 
> What is the basis for supposing it is less applicable for code that IS
> running?

I prefer more specific terms.  samru'e is more specific.

> Why would you find a lujvo which only refers to running software
> somehow more useful than one more closely approximating the English
> term "application", which remains itself even when not being run? 

I prefer more specific terms.

Boy, am I getting sick of having this same tired old argument for the,
what, sixth time?

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"