From cowan Sat Mar 6 22:53:17 2010 Subject: Re: TECH QUERY: variant fu'ivla To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu (Lojban List) From: cowan Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 10:45:19 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9601162204.AA27065@gstldnsrv2.lonnds.ml.com> from "Julian Pardoe LADS LDN X1428" at Jan 16, 96 10:04:29 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1402 X-From-Space-Date: Wed Jan 17 10:45:19 1996 X-From-Space-Address: cowan Message-ID: <1hvyERjrZeP.A.YZ.d10kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org> la .djulian. cusku di'e > Anyway, excuse my ignorance but what is a fu'ivla? It's not a word- > category I remember hearing about. It's the preferred term for what we used to call "le'avla", on the grounds that "le'avla" = "lebnyvalsi" and "lebna" signifies "taking away" rather than just "taking", as if the source language no longer had the word! So now "fu'ivla" = "fukpyvalsi" = "copy-word" (note that a copy need not be a perfect replica of the original). > Hmm! Words like "ricrxacere" sound like what I thought were called > le'avla, i.e. borrowed words, of which the paradigm example is > "djarspageti" (tho' my favorites were the ones that appeared in the > translations of some of Aesop's fables, "resprtestudo" and some word > meaning "crab"). > > Is this right? And what are the = 3> types of fu'ivla? Type 1 = borrowed names Type 2 = ad hoc borrowed brivla, possibly with morphological errors, flagged with prefix "za'e", the nonce-word marker. Type 3 = brivla with gismu-based prefix, the kind most often used. Type 4 = carefully borrowed brivla without prefix At present, Type 2 fu'ivla aren't used, because making Type 3 ones is just too easy, and no official Type 4 ones have been created, because Type 4 is intended for fu'ivla that get into heavy use, and there has been no heavy use of any fu'ivla. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.