From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue May 24 17:56:37 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 24 May 2005 17:56:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DakC9-0002Gu-1C for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 24 May 2005 17:56:25 -0700 Received: from web81309.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.37.84]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DakC5-0002Gm-S5 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 24 May 2005 17:56:24 -0700 Message-ID: <20050525005707.183.qmail@web81309.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [68.88.37.184] by web81309.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 24 May 2005 17:57:07 PDT Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 17:57:07 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: [lojban] Re: railgun 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: 10042 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 Tue, May 24, 2005 at 07:11:40PM -0500, Chris > Capel wrote: > > On 5/24/05, Robin Lee Powell > wrote: > > > On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 06:26:26PM -0500, > Chris Capel wrote: > > > > Even if you needed to refer to this > particular type of gun two > > > > or three dozen times in a story, couldn't > you just begin with > > > > {celxa'i poi cecla lo jimne lo xukmi} > > > > > > My problem with celxa'i, which I did > consider, is that it > > > includes rocket launchers, bows & arrows, > slings, and on and on > > > and on. > > > > But if you think about it, English "gun" > includes things like > > electron guns and staple guns. Staple guns are an odd case in English: they are not generally tubular and the most often use spoing rather than pop (nail guns are also not tubular, but they do use pop). All of these derivative notions of course deserve longer expressions -- as they have in English as well. > If I want English, I know where to find it. > > > So celxa'i isn't really all that much > broader. > > celxa'i is a great word for "projectile weapon" > (which, I would like > to point out, is exactly the same number of > syllables as > xumjimcelxa'i). Which, given its role in English -- as a specialized term of art, not one in common usage -- is about right for "projectile weapon." Even though Lojban words tend to be slightly longer than English, {xumjimcelxa'i} is too long for a word as common as "gun" -- even if you want to restrict it to metal bullet firing, chemical propellant using guns. > It is *not* the right word for > gun, though, because > if it's defined as gun that means I can't use > it in a context where > it is clear that crossbows are what is being > used. > Very true; you need at least to say it is a pop projector, not a spoing or a swish or a bounce. Alas, we don't have gismu for any of these notions : Lojban's "explode" blows things up but not out and the rest don't turn up in any immediately apparent places. There is another question, whether you need the "weapon" part: the two places it gives, shooter and shootee, don't seem essential to the idea of a gun -- even in the restricted sense -- and are readily supplied when needed from the outside. Unless it was important for you to distinguish say police specials (specified users) and deer rifles (specified targets), but again, we don't know about that.