From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Nov 20 14:07:25 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 20 Nov 2006 14:07:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GmHI9-0003wy-KK for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Nov 2006 14:07:05 -0800 Received: from centrmmtao04.cox.net ([70.168.83.80]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GmHI3-0003wP-IK for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Nov 2006 14:07:05 -0800 Received: from eastrmimpo02.cox.net ([68.1.16.120]) by centrmmtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20061120220703.MHHS683.centrmmtao04.cox.net@eastrmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:07:03 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([72.192.234.183]) by eastrmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id pA5z1V00J3y5FKc0000000; Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:06:01 -0500 Message-ID: <456226FC.3030801@lojban.org> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:06:52 -0500 From: Bob LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: ki'a References: <492596e80611182014o7608f9d3k76f7247f5926b98b@mail.gmail.com> <1df90d2b0611182026yeb05a5eo95f815883cb20fd@mail.gmail.com> <836504149.20061119104734@mail.ru> <4560FB73.5060706@lojban.org> <925d17560611201204l6a6b59dbuece7d7cb70a06e6b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <925d17560611201204l6a6b59dbuece7d7cb70a06e6b@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 13223 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Jorge Llambías wrote: > I suppose that "no one" is meant as hyperbole, Yes. > but anyway, I can > immediately think of five people who did have an idea: > Pierre, who coined the fu'ivla > timos, who used it, > Adam and Yanis, who at least knew to look for it in jbovlaste, jbovlaste remains unofficial, and in any event there is little reason to suspect that an arbitrary unfamiliar fu'ivla would be found therein. > and myself, who had used it at least twice, in > > and in , and now it can > also be found in > >> A fu'ivla should remain a Type III - marked by a >> semantic-hint rafsi - until its usage is so common that usage (and/or >> Zipf's law) indicates a need for a shorter form. I don't think that any >> fu'ivla has received such usage. > > pe'i lo cimoi klesi fu'ivla cu mablrmonstrositi gi'e rirci lo ka mi zmanei > ke'a lo vomoi klesi Perhaps, those who are coining them may like them (until caught by a slinku'i error), but those reading them and not familiar with them are probably more likely to appreciate Type IIIs. fu'ivla remain BY POLICY, substandard Lojban, since this encourages the preferred kind of word building using lujvo. Having fu'ivla be aesthetically unpleasing to some people is supportive of this policy. lojbab To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.