From lojban-out@lojban.org Sat May 24 10:05:06 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 59446 invoked from network); 24 May 2003 17:05:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 24 May 2003 17:05:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 May 2003 17:05:02 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19JcS5-0007L0-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 24 May 2003 10:05:01 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19JcRb-0007Ke-00; Sat, 24 May 2003 10:04:31 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 24 May 2003 10:04:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cs24349-133.austin.rr.com ([24.243.49.133] helo=cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19JcQy-0007KL-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 24 May 2003 10:03:52 -0700 Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (asdf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h4OHFU67099646 for ; Sat, 24 May 2003 12:15:30 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from fracture@cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com) Received: (from fracture@localhost) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Submit) id h4OHFUOs099641 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 24 May 2003 12:15:30 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 12:15:30 -0500 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: emotions Message-ID: <20030524171529.GA99432@allusion.net> References: <7FC7B245-8DD5-11D7-AC97-003065D4EC72@optushome.com.au> <200305240751.29472.phma@webjockey.net> <20030524152229.GA98255@allusion.net> <200305241228.10735.phma@webjockey.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200305241228.10735.phma@webjockey.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-archive-position: 5382 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Jordan DeLong From: Jordan DeLong Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 19862 --2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 12:28:10PM -0400, Pierre Abbat wrote: > On Saturday 24 May 2003 11:22, Jordan DeLong wrote: > > Why? > > > > What is with this thought that gismu are somehow privledged brivla? > > This is the same thing that makes people assert that all cultures > > should have gismu, instead of some with gismu and some with lujvo. > > > > If you're talking about rafsi, go use zei. If you're talking about > > word length, many lujvo have only 2 syllables, and 3 is totally > > fine (hell "parasite" is 3 in english). What advantage could you > > possibly see for it being a gismu? >=20 > I repeat, I did not invent {parji}. Go ask whoever did. I did invent {zma= se},=20 > because "-ase" is a common suffix. But you endorsed the concept that some ideas are "common enough" that there "ought to be gismu for them". > > I think this all rests on a fundamental misunderstanding of lojban > > word classes. People like to think about gismu, cmavo and lujvo. > > But it's actually brivla, cmavo and cmene. Gismu, lujvo and fu'ivla > > are just different types of brivla; none are more privledged than > > the others. >=20 > Not true. Some fu'ivla have rafsi (proposed); all gismu except {brod(i,o,= u)}=20 > have rafsi; some gismu have short rafsi. So {malgaci zei smani} cannot be= =20 > shortened, but {glauka zei cnebo} can be shortened to {glaukyne'o}, and=20 > {xamgu zei zmadu} can be shortened to {xagmau}. What's not true? I agree with everything you just said regarding rafsi. I already (preemptively) addressed the rafsi =3D privledge argument; the existence of zei destroys it. --=20 Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u sei la mark. tuen. cusku --2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline [Attachment content not displayed.] --2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO--