From lojbab@access.digex.net Sat Mar 6 22:44:51 2010 Date: Tue May 23 03:09:53 1995 From: Bob LeChevalier Subject: Re: Revenge of the Fat Gismu (no longer Re: TEXT: le gunse ku joi le lorxu) From: "Dylan P. Thurston" X-From-Space-Date: Tue May 23 03:09:53 1995 X-From-Space-Address: lojbab@access.digex.net Message-ID: Dylan: >Is there some other gismu for "Ego" or a lujvo that could be formed? I'm sure some creative soul could come up with one, if we could agree on what it meant. >> I might be inclined to just give "ri" a rafsi - "riz" is the only relevant >> one available though. And the rafsi assignments for sevzi assumed the usage >> frequency implicit in its being the reflexive. > >Hmm. There are problems with {ri}--it wouldn't always be applicable, >e.g., if the places weren't adjacent. True, but you can use conversion to make them adjacent. But I agree - sevzi was designed and hhas been traditionally used for the purpose of reflexive tanru/ lujvo-making, and that should determine the definition - or at least the definaition should encompass that concept as a minimum. >And, of course, whatever is used, the meaning will be ambiguous. I'm >inclined to support Jorge and just recommend sticking in {ri} and not >forming lujvo at all. The English prefix "self-" and the Russian reflexive suffix "cya" are equally ambiguous. But the fact that languages tend to make reflexive lujvo implies that it would be could that Lojban have a way of optionally doing so. You can use "ri" or whatever if you want - indeed you can avoid using any lujvo at all - most Lojban spoken conversation not including Nick Nicholas (%^) uses almost no lujvo of any type, or at most uses ad hoc ones that we devise on the fly. lojbab