From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu Sat Mar 6 23:01:44 2010 Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 23 Sep 1992 13:28:47 -0400 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2562; Wed, 23 Sep 92 13:27:33 EDT Received: by UGA (Mailer R2.08 PTF008) id 2865; Wed, 23 Sep 92 13:27:32 EDT Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1992 18:27:58 BST Reply-To: C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK Sender: Lojban list From: C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK Subject: Re: TECH: Higley (and Shoulson) on lujvo To: Erik Rauch Status: O X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Wed Sep 23 13:28:48 1992 X-From-Space-Address: @uga.cc.uga.edu:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Message-ID: I agree somewhat with Greg, and wholeheartedly with Mark, especially about inappropriate specificity. (I recall once inviting people to join me in a campaign against precision!) I also like to play around with possible lujvo - and go beyond the obvious when trying to coin them. One thing I do in text is that I will sometimes use a more precise lujvo the first time I introduce a concept, and then omit a term or two from it thereafter. Thus having once said "samymrilu" I will thereafter quite happily use "mrilu" later in the passage. Colin