From lojban+bncCOzcnrWBFBDU6orgBBoEN5b5WA@googlegroups.com Sun May 30 11:58:55 2010 Received: from mail-vw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OInia-0001D5-Py; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:54 -0700 Received: by vws15 with SMTP id 15sf407632vws.16 for ; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:34 -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:sender :received:in-reply-to:references:date: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 :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=2/ydIkRtHJWN00BmERCqgNq2bUcnOrXPRXhe/DF2nDM=; b=wtJvs8otQJCSeWeAX5IrmGFcCCSs8DnRBEYDr30TMq3AFIMw9b2bClHsz90hS/nKKR 02m8Oq54Ij/MGjcPGsubUyVX690JmsZgmB/xr8g0PpS5HrRxxECQg7B9bxiMIBr0W3ax A+ihhQ71nfg7tltWINFHrnA5u3ZjlipiITQ1E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references :date: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:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; b=Iifi4jLBu4GqhwpDbMnEwhUcSlJ8hy79voCPh7rX8YMBrST2BoI4UlmFpKmAIjeAag 9anxLQnGlBK32xlQQXqqxxHmjpjhzYCwWYLy4oSXH32GNGVNYdGZ90kFyhXk+xjrZiBJ fb6M5FN0l+zJuKCcrjfVFHE79fj79Sc8p/5eQ= Received: by 10.220.123.217 with SMTP id q25mr166080vcr.38.1275245908524; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:28 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.220.79.85 with SMTP id o21ls1717312vck.0.p; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.75.194 with SMTP id z2mr834763vcj.14.1275245907674; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.75.194 with SMTP id z2mr834760vcj.14.1275245907632; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f48.google.com (mail-vw0-f48.google.com [209.85.212.48]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id b14si3479941vcx.1.2010.05.30.11.58.26; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of pascal.akihiko@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.48; Received: by vws1 with SMTP id 1so3060372vws.35 for ; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.64.161 with SMTP id e33mr1233540qai.299.1275245905818; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.141.8 with HTTP; Sun, 30 May 2010 11:58:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1275230910.1511.5.camel@gumri> Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 19:58:25 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Named multiples From: tijlan To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of pascal.akihiko@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=pascal.akihiko@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: pascal.akihiko@gmail.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: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e64b009a37b6790487d45318 --0016e64b009a37b6790487d45318 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 30 May 2010 18:45, Daniel Brockman wrote: > Obviously we're never going to agree on whether {la} "removes" the > meaning from whatever comes after or if it "retains" the meaning. > I guess we actually can agree on one hand 1) that, in {la donri}, {la} may remove the place structure from {donri} so that {la donri} does not inherently/primarily mean "daytime" as in {lo donri}, and on the other hand 2) that those who are familiar with gismu {donri}'s place structure, may superficially associate {la donri} with the meaning of {lo donri}, which is "daytime", or with something else. In other words, {la donri} may have no inherent/primary meaning other than "that named 'donri'" but may have superficial/secondary meanings such as English "daytime" or Swedish "dag" or whatever people can associate with the string of letters {donri}. > Already, {la irc} is vague about whether spelling or pronunciation is > important. Well, the important thing is whether people can associate the right, intended meaning more with a certain string of letters than with other strings. If to people {irc} is generally more associative of "internet relay chat" (assuming that's the intended meaning) than {iburyc} is, then we should consider {irc} better than {iburyc} as the cmevla for "internet relay chat". -- 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. --0016e64b009a37b6790487d45318 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 30 May 2010 18:45, Daniel Brockman <daniel@brockman.se&g= t; wrote:
Obviously we're never going to agree on whether {la} "removes"= ; the
meaning from whatever comes after or if it "retains" the meaning.=

I guess we actually can agree on one hand 1) that= , in {la donri}, {la} may remove the place structure from {donri} so that {= la donri} does not inherently/primarily mean "daytime" as in {lo = donri}, and on the other hand 2) that those who are familiar with gismu {do= nri}'s place structure, may superficially associate {la donri} with the= meaning of {lo donri}, which is "daytime", or with something els= e. In other words, {la donri} may have no inherent/primary meaning other th= an "that named 'donri'" but may have superficial/secondar= y meanings such as English "daytime" or Swedish "dag" o= r whatever people can associate with the string of letters {donri}.

=A0
Already, {la irc} is vague about whether spelling or pronunciation is impor= tant.

Well, the important thing is whether people can = associate the right, intended meaning more with a certain string of letters= than with other strings. If to people {irc} is generally more associative = of "internet relay chat" (assuming that's the intended meanin= g) than {iburyc} is, then we should consider {irc} better than {iburyc} as = the cmevla for "internet relay chat".