From - Tue Aug 06 11:27:18 1996
Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [206.241.12.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id VAA20537 for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 21:04:29 -0400
Message-Id: <199608060104.VAA20537@locke.ccil.org>
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (206.241.12.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <3.F8B90433@VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:37:16 -0500
Date:         Mon, 5 Aug 1996 17:35:20 -0700
Reply-To: David A Johnston <davejohn@POGO.WV.TEK.COM>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
X-UIDL: 839293714.000
From: David A Johnston <davejohn@POGO.WV.TEK.COM>
Subject:      male/female, man/woman, human/person
X-To:         Lojban Mailing list <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: U
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
Content-Length:  841


  Okay, the powers that be in the lojban community  discourage the use of
nanmu (man) and ninmu (woman), saying that they're sexist.  Okay, I
totally understand and support that guideline.  The thing is, I wonder why
they even exist as gismu.  Why not just combine fetsi (female) with prenu
(person) to form fetpre (female person)?  (Or would it be fetypre?)  It
seems that fetpre and ninmu mean the same thing.  They both have the same
place structure, and are non-age and -species specific.

  Any thoughts?

-marvin

/*-------------------------------------------------------*/
a(m,W)float m,W;{int e=1;float p,Q,n;p=m;Q=W;while(e++<126)
{n=p;p=p*p-Q*Q+m;Q=2*n*Q+W;if((p*p+Q*Q)>=4)return e;}return
0;}main(){float _,E=1.5;while((E-=0.130434783)>-1.5){for(_=
(-2);_<1;_+=0.037974684)putchar(a(_,E)+32);putchar('\n');}}