From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Apr 28 17:05:46 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:05:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DRJ0k-0004Bj-M9 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:05:38 -0700 Received: from web81307.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.37.82]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DRJ0i-0004BU-7A for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:05:38 -0700 Message-ID: <20050429000505.26045.qmail@web81307.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [65.69.48.37] by web81307.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:05:05 PDT Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:05:05 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: [lojban] Re: Penguicon Lojban Presentation To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: 6667 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 9896 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --- Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 02:07:32PM -0700, John > E Clifford wrote: > > > > --- Robin Lee Powell > wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 01:08:51PM -0700, > John E Clifford wrote: > > > > > > > > --- Jorge Llamb?as > > > wrote: > > > > > On 4/28/05, Robin Lee Powell > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 06:59:11AM > -0700, > > > > > John E Clifford wrote: > > > > > > > cmalenku > > > > > > > > > > > > ki'a sai .o'o cu'i > > > > > > > > > > pe'i smudji zo zabna i cumki ji'a fa lo > nu > > > lo tu vensa za'o na > > > > > banzu glari'a > > > > > > > > > Well, yes, it was meant to be favorable > and, > > > yes, Spring here has > > > > goone from 8os back to 40s (Fahrenheit, > > > obviously). But all I did > > > > was observe -- like Robin -- that the > events > > > described were cool > > > > (calque and thus not really approved, but > it > > > was a short joke). > > > > > > Wow. I'm so used to the literalism of > Lojban > > > that, as usual, the > > > joke never occured to me. > > > > > Gee, I can't even claim this as a fancy > > metaphorical lujvo; {cma} has been used > > consistently as a diminutive and/or lessening > > prefix since the get-go. > > *blink* > > Is that relevant? > > I was talking about "cool" meaning "good". > Sorry. You mentioned literalism and I took you to be commenting the structure of {cmalenku}, which is less analytic than most compounds (but has roots going back to Loglan). As noted, using the calque is disapproved of -- from literalness again, as you say. I missed that aspect of the literal-fixation. > >