Date:  Thu, 9 Apr 1998 13:13:57 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199804091713.NAA19126@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Subject:      Re: [lojban] ratni xa
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-UIDL: c72ca349ec8e1d747e1c87e3b44a8c6b
X-Mozilla-Status: 8011
Content-Length: 938
Lines: 31

Lionel:
>Is {tabgreku ratstura} a translation clear enough for 'a carbon-frame
molecule'?

It seems clear enough to me.

>Do I have to translate C14 as {ratni xa fi pavo}, since {ratni xa pavo}
>could be confused with {ratni xapavo} -- even if so heavy an element hasn't
>been discovered yet.

Actually, it's {ratni li xa li pavo}. You need {li} in front of the number
to use it
as a sumti. Without {li}, the number will act as a quantifier of the
following
sumti, if there is one.

There we have {ratni} as the selbri. If you want to use it as a sumti then
you
need {lo ratni be li xa bei li pavo}.

>Is it generally recommended to use {ratni <number>} rather than a
standalone
>word in scientific papers?

Probably not, but there hasn't been any scientific papers in Lojban yet.

>Is {skevalsi} understandable as a title for a science lexicon?

I would say that's "scientific term". For the lexicon maybe {skevlaste}.

co'o mi'e xorxes