From cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!LOJBAN Fri Oct 4 15:42:35 1991 Return-Path: Date: Fri Oct 4 15:42:35 1991 Message-Id: <9110041917.AA27758@relay1.UU.NET> Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Hebrew guitars X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan , Eric Raymond , Eric Tiedemann Status: RO Mark Shoulson writes: >BTW, on some old news. In my Psalm 137 translation, I used a le'avla, >something like "zgitcirkinora" to indicate a kind of musical instrument. >On further perusal of the gismu list, I see that I don't even need a lujvo >le'avla, since a kinor is a stringed intrument (whether lyre or harp or >even violin), and thus falls into the gismu "jgita"=guitar, yielding >"gitkinora" or something. It would be "gitrkinora" as a le'avla - it is wise to glue the rafsi on the front with a vocalic consonant to avoid 'slinkui' problems and that is a basic 'rule' of the current approach, if not mandatory (I actually think your word is a valid le'avla, but need to check much harder if not following the 'rule'. Of course, my obvious reply is to work within the language, using le'avla only if you need to: brojgita seems a more than adequate lujvo given you definition, and one or two extra terms in the lujvo would narrow it down if it were vital to specify what kind of stringed instrument it is. this is why we put a few archetypal instruments in the gismu list - to make it easier to avoid making le'avla, which are strictly second-class words in the language when you've got a choice. lojbab@grebyn.com