From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu Oct 16 16:31:31 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 6660 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2003 23:31:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 16 Oct 2003 23:31:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Oct 2003 23:31:31 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.22) id 1AAHac-00042Y-TI for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 16:31:30 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.22) id 1AAHa5-00041V-D8; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 16:30:57 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 16 Oct 2003 16:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.22) id 1AAHZq-00040y-3X for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 16:30:42 -0700 Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 16:30:42 -0700 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Posterity Badness. Message-ID: <20031016233042.GL1016@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20031016173454.GV28761@digitalkingdom.org> <20031016181252.9273.qmail@web41902.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031016181252.9273.qmail@web41902.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-archive-position: 6450 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell Reply-To: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 20931 On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 11:12:52AM -0700, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > > --- Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > 'angeli'. > > > > Other than that, no idea. Having seen the word 'angeli', I > > simply assumed that it was written by a very poor Lojbanist, and > > didn't read the rest. I'm rather surprised to find out I was > > wrong. > > That's an odd reaction. {angeli} is a valid fu'ivla, it is the > type of culturally specific word that fu'ivla were meant for, and > on top of that it has seen some usage other than in this piece. I > remembered having read this passage on the list before, though I > didn't remember it was from tsali. I don't like type-4. I *especially* don't like type-4 when the concept is trivially expressible with a lujvo (in this case cesru'i or cesycrida, take your pick). And I had no idea it was valid. My internal Lojban recognizer screamed at the sight of it (a comment Bob has also often made), and cmafihe choked on it. -Robin -- Me: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. "Constant neocortex override is the only thing that stops us all from running out and eating all the cookies." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky http://www.lojban.org/ *** .i cimo'o prali .ui