From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Jan 11 15:01:37 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 70023 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2006 23:01:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2006 23:01:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Jan 2006 23:01:36 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1EwoyA-0007Qu-U8 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:01:31 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ewox0-0007Nh-04; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:00:18 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:00:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1EwowY-0007Mp-4d for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:59:50 -0800 Received: from web81312.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.128]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1EwowV-0007MS-Qo for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:59:49 -0800 Received: (qmail 85427 invoked by uid 60001); 11 Jan 2006 22:59:46 -0000 Message-ID: <20060111225946.85425.qmail@web81312.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [70.230.158.161] by web81312.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:59:46 PST Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:59:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <537d06d00601111159x225ecdc2g1a63370a44df5ec8@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-archive-position: 11041 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0 X-eGroups-From: John E Clifford From: John E Clifford Reply-To: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net Subject: [lojban] Re: About my chop X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=CQ2Xg7t_OmPp_PjQ7kmH7DaCzq5e0n9qOu93FDLNPJ6oy8ETOQ X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 25441 --- Philip Newton wrote: > On 10/16/05, John E Clifford > wrote: > > Ok, this has NOTHING to do with Lojban, but I > > think there must be some Chinese scholars out > in > > this group. > > > > I am thinking of getting a seal made while I > am > > in China. Years ago, my Chinese Culture > > professor (Lee Shao Chang, as we wrote it > then), > > gave me a name: > > chi li fu (now, I suppose qi li fu) which he > > wrote with (Unicode/GB/Big5 -- I can't get > any of > > these to print right consistently) qi2 "pray" > > (7948/C6ED/ACE8) fu2 "good fortune" > > (798F/B8A2/BAD6) but for li he used something > > that looks like the phonetic of li4 > > "sharp"(4FD0/C0FE/AB57), that is, without the > > "man" radical. > > So you mean li4 "gains, advantage, profit, > merit" (5229/3291/A751)? > > Also very commonly used to transcribe foreign > names containing a "li" sound. > > > The meaning he gave it was that > > for li3 "bountiful"(8C4A/-/E054). > > I thought that character is read "feng1"... and > according to the > Unicode.org site, that character is read either > "li3" or "feng1", but > they say it's a simplified form (used e.g. in > Japan) of 8C50/-/C2D7 -- > which, it says, is read only "feng1". (The > simplified form used in > China is 4E30/2365/A4A5). So I'm not sure where > the li3 reading comes > from. The site gives "abundant, lush, > bountiful, plenty" as the > definition of either character. > > > So after all > > these years I have to ask (before I get my > seal > > cut) whether Dr. Lee was having a joke on me > or > > whether his character is a legitimate way of > > writing li3 "bountiful" > > IMO no. > > > or whether he just goofed. > > Maybe what he said was that U+5229 meant > something similar to U+8C4A/U+8C50? > > > (I don't expect you to figure out the first > part, > > so the second and third are the important > ones). > > Not sure whether I can help you there. > > I'd say it's probably safe to go ahead with > U+5229 -- not only is it > commonly used in transcriptions, its meaning is > also positive, as far > as I can tell. > Thanks. As you will notice in the records, someone came up with the right character and a close enough meaning ("profitable", I think) to allow me to go ahead with what I had. It also turns out that seal cutters in China -- at least at the touristy places I went -- are pretty conversant in English and pretty well up on these sorts of questions. The one I finally used and I chatted a while about it and figured out what Dr. Lee probably meant and cut the seal accordingly (he also did some nice things for my daughter Sara (si ri "silk sun/day") and wife Martha (ma hua - "agate bouquet" -- skipping the usual "horse" though that "ma" is used as the phonetic behind a "jade" radical). To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.