From adamgarrigus@gmail.com Mon Feb 07 11:45:58 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:45:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.194])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34)
	id 1CyEpS-0006Px-JW
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:45:50 -0800
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 71so951929wra
        for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:45:19 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references;
        b=P6eQYxkUKyRdcSITJ3PDiVgFEW5ng4Vttv71dNpU1w939z4LHm7VMYS/WL0dOSDGT4V1kGZ/l+HvXKOJ5/OSHsTk62UGVOp1OeTcJaC7YI2NMGSi9MguknzCi/SdnAHm/lZzwYPJdPx9FrY7bjQEdM4zZvXJJcX98ECzsqzSDKI=
Received: by 10.54.52.5 with SMTP id z5mr57678wrz;
        Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:45:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.54.35.48 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 11:45:18 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <12d58c1605020711456320be43@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:45:18 -0500
From: Adam COOPER <adamgarrigus@gmail.com>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: panda article
In-Reply-To: <200502071404.51814.phma@phma.hn.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis
References: <200502060119.15854.phma@phma.hn.org>
	 <12d58c16050207080016a5e957@mail.gmail.com>
	 <200502071404.51814.phma@phma.hn.org>
X-archive-position: 9439
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: adamgarrigus@gmail.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

This is now O.T., but

"Tibet" < Ar. "Tabbatus" < Chin. (Tang dyn.) "Tubo"

and yes the "bo" is thought to be related to "Bod"


On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:04:51 -0500, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.hn.org> wrote:
> On Monday 07 February 2005 11:00, Adam COOPER wrote:
> > This may be nitpicky, but I don't think you can get away with {la
> > tiBET.} You could say {la'o ly. tiBET ly.} because I think the word
> > first appears in Latin by Jesuit missionaries (it's apparently
> > ultimately from an ancient Chinese word for the country). Or the
> > Chinese {la'o jy. cidzan jy.} The native name is pronounced "Po" or
> > "Puh" or something, with a silent "d". So maybe {la pyd.}
> 
> According to Wikipedia, it's trasliterated "Bod" and pronounced "Pö". The
> article doesn't say where "Tibet" comes from, but maybe "bet" is related to
> "bod". I don't know how to pronounce Tibetan, but {pyd} sounds reasonable.
> 
> phma
> --
> AS d- s-: a+ c+++ p+ t f S+ e++ h r->++ n-(++)* i P- m++ M+