From mathmaniac@hanmail.net Tue May 27 02:29:55 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: mathmaniac@hanmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 56913 invoked from network); 27 May 2003 09:29:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 27 May 2003 09:29:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n9.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.93) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 27 May 2003 09:29:54 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.163] by n9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 May 2003 09:29:52 -0000 Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 09:29:51 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: nonce lujvo? (was: Beginner's take on the open/closed gismu debate) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <00ac01c3242f$5d47df40$8d9eb280@ic.intranet.epfl.ch> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1121 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "sshiskom" X-Originating-IP: 143.248.205.98 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122399845 X-Yahoo-Profile: sshiskom X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 19920 >> ...problem is the tendency for some users to introduce nonce lujvo >> (e.g. in Chapter 2 of "Alice in Wonderland", I see the word >> "camri'ojvebla" ?!?) > Trust me, that was easy: I have a vague knowledge of very few rafsi > and I can recognize maybe half the gismu, but I can recognize > "intense green and blue" easily. I am worried that this became > a lujvo. Is it for meter or something? why wasn't it just > {carmi crino je(bo) blanu}? To make it more believable, here's a comment from two-month-old Lojbanist: it IS easy to recognize. {cam} for {carmi}, {ri'o} for {crino}, {bla} for {blanu} I recognized easily, and with a little effort I could remember that {je} has two rafsi, {jev} and {jve}. I write this, because I know what you feel. lujvo looked bewildering when I first started Lojban, too. But it really isn't. Here I'm not saying that memorizing rafsi are easy, but once you know rafsi, seperating components from lujvo needs just a little excercise. By the way, I agree to Dyke that tanru seems more appropriate in this case, although I didn't look up the context. mi'e sanxiyn.