From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat May 30 12:51:20 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 30 May 2009 12:51:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MAUaN-0001vm-V6 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sat, 30 May 2009 12:51:20 -0700 Received: from mail-ew0-f213.google.com ([209.85.219.213]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MAUaK-0001vB-EJ for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 30 May 2009 12:51:19 -0700 Received: by ewy9 with SMTP id 9so6366619ewy.34 for ; Sat, 30 May 2009 12:51:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=g2+yORI5R55aYviOimdFKwgPCBsvE3QZxEDo5xJbXJw=; b=ToZSpgZTzavO6P2itqHjEFImcknN/AFiyFZeoR0M1ClvaRIuAsgLTPcSGo4LGfGCXX L899xDiPvYGTg1EMIYQY8c/dv5NkoPImMtFUhhSFqLPO8VHTfIEFsuXlPdRxcPTyMFEM IOBmKo+5Q4xXh9MKTfJ0puQDCVguPxRLDRBz0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=GepgPrdxzEPvkFFPcrlv73pKjhoUg1QHro/TlROnLeAVs33aUu0wkBQT+IzHrh8gQJ Tbh+vXnNDw/O13Cnc7iQARfsMruSJiUOHG/Xcp5m9BXulToDnmFT07RGVIBjkCdvW9tb G/Hc2a3S0VwMi7zGUEiXyIqar1XCpVRE/zbNo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.26.205 with SMTP id c55mr1402645wea.1.1243713069706; Sat, 30 May 2009 12:51:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5715b9300905301157g37c96bfbq96b3142d1761f081@mail.gmail.com> References: <5715b9300905301157g37c96bfbq96b3142d1761f081@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 15:51:09 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 657eacfabede15d3 Message-ID: <12d58c160905301251h292fffebu7bc864e53cccf789@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban] Re: sel ter vel xel From: "komfo,amonan" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636d34597b8ed33046b2683d8 X-archive-position: 15624 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: komfoamonan@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --001636d34597b8ed33046b2683d8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Luke Bergen wrote: > I know I've read something about a "great rafsi relocation" and that not > wanting to cause another one of these is the main reason behind not changing > "tel" for stela (lock) to something else is out of the question. But that > was a while ago. Is it still completely out of the question to change just > one little rafsi so we can have 100% consistency instead of 99.9% > consistency? > > I just picture teaching my kids lojban and them saying "but dad, you said > that there are no exceptions toe the rules in lojban, why is the rafsi of > 'te' 'ter' when all the others are just themselves plus 'l'?". Are there any rules about rafsi besides their forms & the fact that every gismu has at least one? Certainly there is no rule saying that the rafsi for the SE-cmavo have to rhyme. Moreover, {ter-} is so commonly used that the anomaly doesn't seem to cause much difficulty. And I would argue that mistakenly using {tel-} in its place is unlikely to confound, due to the semantic gap between {te} and {stela}. Lastly, a weighty argument against drastically changing word meanings is retention of the intelligibility of existing texts. I agree that it's annoying, though. mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan --001636d34597b8ed33046b2683d8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrot= e:
I know I've read something about a "great rafsi relocation" a= nd that not wanting to cause another one of these is the main reason behind= not changing "tel" for stela (lock) to something else is out of = the question.=C2=A0 But that was a while ago.=C2=A0 Is it still completely = out of the question to change just one little rafsi so we can have 100% con= sistency instead of 99.9% consistency?

I just picture teaching my kids lojban and them saying "but dad, y= ou said that there are no exceptions toe the rules in lojban, why is the ra= fsi of 'te' 'ter' when all the others are just themselves p= lus 'l'?".

Are there any rules about rafsi besides their forms & the fact= that every gismu has at least one? Certainly there is no rule saying that = the rafsi for the SE-cmavo have to rhyme. Moreover, {ter-} is so commonly u= sed that the anomaly doesn't seem to cause much difficulty. And I would= argue that mistakenly using {tel-} in its place is unlikely to confound, d= ue to the semantic gap between {te} and {stela}. Lastly, a weighty argument= against drastically changing word meanings is retention of the intelligibi= lity of existing texts.

I agree that it's annoying, though.

mu'o mi'e komfo,= amonan

--001636d34597b8ed33046b2683d8-- 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.