Message-Id: <9106071611.AA14353@relay2.UU.NET>
From: cbmvax!uunet!ctr.columbia.edu!shoulson
Date: Fri Jun  7 17:57:44 1991
To: CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu!FTSLR@ALASKA.BITNET
Cc: lojban-list@snark.thyrsus.com
In-Reply-To: "STEVE L RICE"'s message of Thu, 06 Jun 91 22:43:30 -0900 <9106070646.AA23670@relay1.UU.NET>
Status: RO

FTSLR@ALASKA.BITNET (STEVE L RICE) writes:
 [ ... discussion on predicates jegvo xriso budjo etc ... ]

I just finished a private letter to lojbab in whihc I voiced many of the
same points, with the same solutions.  It just makes sense that budjo and
jegvo should be cmene (proper names) (though you're predication of budjo is
probably valid).  At least for God, well, that's how it's used!

xriso is another thing.  There's always la .iecus. or la .iesus., but for
"Christ" you might as well do a translation.  Why introduce a gismu?
"Christ," a translation of Hebrew /maciax/ ("Messiah") means "the
annointed" (as I'm sure you've all heard).  So a sumti like 'the one who
has been poured-upon' (le SE BRODA), perhaps with some descriptive tanru
stuff to indicate that it's not just some wet guy, but the pouring was
really annointing, would go better.  Taking the later Christian view of
"Christ" du "Savior," then, well, translate savior!  One who saves!  These
concepts are not primitive.  The concept of "religious leader" or
"spiritual guide" or even "prophet" are not indivisible concepts.  Hell, I
used two words for two of them in English, and "prophet" can be "le cevni
cusku" (here the ambiguity of tanru is just what we need) ("the god talker"
-- could be to god, in a godly manner, etc...)  Maybe le se cevni cusku,
but that's probably not worth it.

~mark