Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 23:14:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199704100314.XAA18660@mail3.access.digex.net> Reply-To: Lee Daniel Crocker Sender: Lojban list From: Lee Daniel Crocker Organization: Piclab (http://www.piclab.com/) Subject: Re: CPE: Corliss Lamont X-To: Lojban Group To: Logical Language Group In-Reply-To: <199704100241.TAA27771@mail.calweb.com> from "Jorge J. Llambias" at "Apr 9, 97 11:35:15 pm" X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 2074 X-From-Space-Date: Wed Apr 9 23:14:23 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU > There are two main types of lujvo: Those where the > modifier component fills a slot of the main component, > and those where the two components act jointly. For > example: > > tsudegji [rotsu degji] d1=r1 d2 > x1 is a thumb (thick-finger) of x2. > > degro'u [degji rotsu] r1=d1 d2 > x1 is a thumb (finger-thick) of x2. > > In this case, both orders are equivalent, because both words > describe the same oject, something that is both thick and a > finger. {rotsu je degji}. I don't think that works at all. Even though neither "thick" nor "finger" fills a place of the other here, there should be no question that tsudegji is a kind of finger, and degro'u is a kind of thickness--perhaps one could describe a branch as being finger-thick. Surely one should not abandon the basic rule that a tanru is a kind of (its tertau)? > In other lujvo (the majority, I think) the modifier > component fills a slot of the main component. For example: > > rirnybu'a [rirni bruna]: b1 (b2=r1) r2 > x1 is the uncle (brother of parent) of x2. > > Here of course the lujvo is not reversible. > > There are some cases, like {ji'ervi'o}, where it seems at first > that both expansions can be made: something that is permanent > in being alive, or the symetrical one, something that is both alive > and permanent. But this latter form I find kind of twisted, ... Again, I don't see that. Either it's a permanent kind of living, if it's the living you want to emphasize in the structure; or it's a living kind of permanence, if you want to emphasize the latter. I don't think "alive and permanent" is really an option unless you want to say so explicitly with a connective. In this case, I think either one works fine. -- Lee Daniel Crocker "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC