Return-Path: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@vms.dc.LSOFT.COM Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id RAA08750 for ; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 17:39:15 +0200 Message-Id: <199602101539.RAA08750@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi> Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C7865112 ; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 16:39:15 +0100 Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 10:37:03 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: *old response on xorvo To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Content-Length: 781 Lines: 18 Paulo: >>[...] I may not have the vaguest idea where >>Croatia is, but i do know that gugdrxrvatska is a country - I do not >>necessarily know that about xorvo. > >That's not fair :-( You should compare {gugdrxrvatska} to {xorvygugde} >or {xrogu'e}, not to {xorvo} itself. You only know that gugdrxrvatska >is a country because of the rafsi prefix. Ah, but then the syllable savings in using the word is much less. Most culture words aren't going to get short rafsi, even unofficially, since they won't lie in the part of the alphabet that Xrvatska/Croatia does. xorvygugde vs. gugdrxrvatska saves only one syllable, and at the cost of significant recognizability on the part of those who MIGHT know the Croatian word (any international stamp collector among others). lojbab