From lojban+bncCNTM-bHNDhC3n__fBBoEh2WyLQ@googlegroups.com Fri May 28 07:14:32 2010 Received: from mail-vw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OI0KS-0005vy-Q4; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:32 -0700 Received: by vws11 with SMTP id 11sf258735vws.16 for ; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:21 -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:received-spf:received:date:from:to:subject :in-reply-to:message-id:references:user-agent:mime-version :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=jUXR2CvQnp805yF59Toe1hAmUe6poR0w+pJjwX1CTPA=; b=Jm6afbloYLXlBJEfw/fr4bfvRWlZbOfybrLhr66ughRGESB91pXMTJez760T/OrSlL b8uMq+K4O0afJ/6d6RR10ivCgKJhzjxUiOq2OHyt4wYzVR/4EPycnx4hE4Wb+MX0XIhs 2Z8I6NhOuRL7IisSat3IGEpXIaLlBgnPJcGAU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to :message-id:references:user-agent:mime-version :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=evlGlV40pMsK1T2+SwZJaLo4BGa/4y3A7xCfOFhbIZADd+eWadqIiUmrT7rV6Yi4R1 AquI19Ao9h3p29TKXz0gSLR4hur8d3kB8AY9IeQSyaD/uDhO2yx7vWtyGtdsk+vqwVT5 9EBfP5E3nY54LvatrXnh9cwtDURkPYnDTb++8= Received: by 10.229.112.18 with SMTP id u18mr34633qcp.47.1275056055423; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:15 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.27.66 with SMTP id h2ls767152qcc.1.p; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.73.30 with SMTP id o30mr16523qaj.11.1275056054075; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.156.146 with SMTP id x18mr386183ibw.10.1274886541377; Wed, 26 May 2010 08:09:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.156.146 with SMTP id x18mr386182ibw.10.1274886540626; Wed, 26 May 2010 08:09:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cec.wustl.edu (express.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.21.16]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id cr37si121594ibb.4.2010.05.26.08.09.00; Wed, 26 May 2010 08:09:00 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 128.252.21.16 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of adam@pubcrawler.org) client-ip=128.252.21.16; Received: from grid.cec.wustl.edu (grid.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.20.97]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.cec.wustl.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56DD01E805A; Wed, 26 May 2010 10:09:00 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 10:09:00 -0500 (CDT) From: "Adam D. Lopresto" To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] fu'ivla's definition: loanword or morphological class In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <4e37532f-631a-41f2-a341-2895efaea0b6@y18g2000prn.googlegroups.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LRH 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 128.252.21.16 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of adam@pubcrawler.org) smtp.mail=adam@pubcrawler.org X-Original-Sender: adam@pubcrawler.org 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; format=flowed On Tue, 25 May 2010, Warrigal wrote: > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 2:47 PM, symuyn wrote: >> There have been some discussions on the IRC room about {fu'ivla} and >> its proper definition. >> >> People currently use {fu'ivla} to refer to: A. general loanwords >> between any two languages or B. the Lojban morphological class of >> brivla. These are definitely two different concepts, though they >> happen to overlap a lot in Lojban. >> >> The question is: which definition should {fu'ivla} be defined to have? > > Much like the English word "salsa" (which means a specific > Spanish-related type of sauce, whereas the Spanish word "salsa" simply > means "sauce"), the Lojban word {fu'ivla} should mean "loanword", > whereas the English word "fu'ivla" should mean "member of the Lojban > morphological class of brivla designed to accomodate loanwords". That sounds like it would lead to absolutely horrible confusion. We finally got "cmene"/{cmene}/{cmevla} straightened out, let's not reintroduce the same problem for "fu'ivla"/{fu'ivla}. That said, {fu'ivla} does seem more natural for a loan word. Not sure what would be a good word for a non-gismu non-lujvo brivla, though. {zi'evla} is cute, but seems to break under analysis (exactly who is free to do what under what conditions?). Also, should there perhaps be separate words for distinguishing type-3 from type-4? Not that there shouldn't be a word for the combined class, just pondering. -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ The box said "Requires Windows 95 or better." I can't understand why it won't work on my Linux computer. -- 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.