From lojban-out@lojban.org Sun Sep 14 04:39:12 2003 Return-Path: Date: Sun Sep 14 04:39:12 2003 X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 11647 invoked from network); 14 Sep 2003 11:39:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 14 Sep 2003 11:39:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Sep 2003 11:39:11 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19yVDi-0007cC-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:39:10 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19yVCx-0007b7-00; Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:38:23 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no ([129.241.210.67] ident=[4XVxiKG0IyXRZw2s6KEbKQEGLbgjT8KA]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19yVCn-0007ao-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:38:13 -0700 Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no ([IPv6:::ffff:129.241.210.68]:57267 "EHLO hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no" ident: "NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]" whoson: "-unregistered-") by sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no with ESMTP id ; Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:38:03 +0200 Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:36:57 +0200 (CEST) X-X-Sender: arj@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: la tam, la meris In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-archive-position: 6144 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arj@nvg.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Arnt Richard Johansen From: Arnt Richard Johansen Reply-To: arj@nvg.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 20626 On Sun, 14 Sep 2003, xah wrote: > why is Tom translated to "la tam." not "la tom.", and Mary to "la > meris." not "la meri."? The former because the Am. E. long 'o' lies auditively closer to the Lojban 'a' than the Lojban 'o'. A British Tom, on the other hand, would be "la tom." in Lojban. The latter because the word formation rules of Lojban dictates that all words belonging to the name-class ends with a consonant, and 's' has arisen as a convention in cases where there are no final consonants in the original language. "la meri" breaks up as "la me ri", and is actually a valid name, albeit a rather strange one. It translates as something like "One Of Them". -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ Information wants to be antropomorhized!