From lojban+bncCICntNPQBRCrs_DfBBoEPvvicw@googlegroups.com Tue May 25 11:41:09 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f202.google.com ([209.85.217.202]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OGz3f-0006d6-SI; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:41:08 -0700 Received: by gxk26 with SMTP id 26sf4537330gxk.10 for ; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received:date :in-reply-to:x-ip:references:user-agent:x-http-useragent:message-id :subject:from:to:x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=puq/wWY1b4hWzJmBNujGjQ684mZPMUjcq30jgPsPdIY=; b=i/SAGMrr7soRYkHmHFGx3Zh4HgYxRSih08Jejlv7lNS0jVOixR0FM9MSAIQgDpZtY5 taZHRdl4lgNRnbp4GLLb3ekTEFC1xSwd9Z1wlDxnOfuIP2OmWaC5i9w0/WpAg9nK78wU NY1MOpcsYs3OVEVNRS3f1IXi+qe9EoBkeUpTw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:date:in-reply-to:x-ip :references:user-agent:x-http-useragent:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=yjP016LLmKDEM9eHOdmYZ4QbJgCUaIA3flJTXfRokzMi+NnV3QbbM77fKbhXDUPGF6 hhV1OZ6qMBrnN1kfUFxzhzXiuw9E8Vw9Jlw8cjr20Fjk2y4zITKpr5XF7++cV4KGBf1a RMOXM8s0CrQ9dLbMW9112OLhYUWySi2tw2usQ= Received: by 10.91.56.20 with SMTP id i20mr330283agk.5.1274812843784; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:43 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.91.91.7 with SMTP id t7ls264agl.1.p; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.91.150.2 with SMTP id c2mr3451686ago.13.1274812842079; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.91.150.2 with SMTP id c2mr3451684ago.13.1274812842024; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gx0-f192.google.com (mail-gx0-f192.google.com [209.85.217.192]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 11si526341gxk.5.2010.05.25.11.40.42; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:42 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.217.192 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lindarthebard@yahoo.com) client-ip=209.85.217.192; Received: by gxk8 with SMTP id 8so4676928gxk.12 for ; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.172.18 with SMTP id u18mr404953ybe.60.1274812841915; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by y6g2000pra.googlegroups.com with HTTP; Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 11:40:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-IP: 173.196.20.139 References: <3414c7b0-2a75-4cb2-99a4-0afa6458f6ba@t34g2000prd.googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.3) Gecko/20100401 Firefox/3.6.3 ( .NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe) Message-ID: <7ac5ef76-747a-4077-ac8d-bd45e0c68005@y6g2000pra.googlegroups.com> Subject: [lojban] Re: Named multiples From: Lindar To: lojban X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.217.192 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lindarthebard@yahoo.com) smtp.mail=lindarthebard@yahoo.com X-Original-Sender: lindarthebard@yahoo.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Why is it a horrible idea? What are the meanings of the stage-three > and stage-four fu'ivla "cidjrspageti" and "spageti"? It breaks the 'phonological fluidity' of the language by putting irregular word-forms in places where they aren't normally allowed. While I think the idea is great in theory, it probably isn't so much in practice. The apparent advantages don't really outweigh the disadvantages, methinks. While it would allow names in tanru (so I can have a xorxes-ish laugh or a camgusmis-ish smile), allowing them to mean anything other than "x1 is called..." would just allow laziness. Why bother learning the fu'ivla, or even coming up with one when we can just use cmevla strings and give them any definition we want? > As I said, I would use "spageti", not ".spagetis." for "spaghetti", Right, but that's you. I see the possibility for a huge trend to come of this where people -don't- bother with fu'ivla, and possibly don't even bother with lujvo because it's easier to use selbri cmevla. Even so, really what you're doing is forcing every .namestring. to be read with "me la", which makes me wonder why we can't just keep doing that. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.