From lojban+bncCIycn8S8DhDvg4HhBBoEwwLbbA@googlegroups.com Mon Jun 21 21:54:23 2010 Received: from mail-qw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.216.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OQvV5-00041j-Tu; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:23 -0700 Received: by qwg5 with SMTP id 5sf566093qwg.16 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:13 -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 :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0iZoxqj5VqxmDb3x6DmXnImgpUOegJ3VIyYjy3JnST0=; b=w+nKDvBhg0sv2XYulLBx5upn4ShHvDeuFqg7CKtlfQRwBU7sFP9KsuXiun3Xd32N9m D8KrmmgzyJJdpY5TFDlDKsAAUNu2E/9mf/HcIpJsBPxe94CTi4Ocn6gcgHtNmt6AhY1P lEG91mfgkRIp8Hh2ABx2+YOmaBcciwLLLokQQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=D/ROTaVmCG6kG+DQHy+DUAO2XF+5IKm3rK/17gQaCl/ttXoVxs+ixU00dErpHQDqNJ q/3D03qfG60ayzsZn8rRolCvwQoT4uYalqKbIx6A+FIeP2kcDpDt3XGgAapQciiqFUWg dYW8fyv4wRXtPzC4vX1oHQpBD3ztwc0yRS+8k= Received: by 10.229.51.193 with SMTP id e1mr187017qcg.47.1277182447389; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:07 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.2.96 with SMTP id 32ls2872226qci.2.p; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.73.30 with SMTP id o30mr322103qaj.11.1277182446093; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.73.30 with SMTP id o30mr322102qaj.11.1277182446067; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id i17si132646qci.10.2010.06.21.21.54.04; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:05 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.44 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.44; Received: by vws15 with SMTP id 15so2313706vws.3 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.236.65 with SMTP id kj1mr3050024qcb.37.1277182444790; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.190.201 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:54:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 00:54:04 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] The place structure of {selma'o} From: Michael Turniansky To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: mturniansky@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.44 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=mturniansky@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam_score: 0.8 X-Spam_score_int: 8 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "chain.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Daniel Brockman wrote: > The term "selma'o" (in both English and Lojban) actually has very little to do > with cmavo. It's used for any word, and we have selma'o like CMENE and BRIVLA. > > Remarkably, {selma'o} doesn't even have a proper definition in jbovlaste. > I propose the following place structure: > > selma'o: x1=c2 is the grammatical class of the word x2=c1 > with role x3=c3 in language x4=c4. > > Note that I have dropped the reference to cmavo, and adapted the meaning > of the x3 to be the role of the selma'o rather than the meaning of the word. > > I like this for several reasons, the biggest one of course being that it > causes the word {selma'o} to make sense and be useful and intuitive. > > I also like the fact that this definition makes {selma'o} != {se cmavo} (though > they would still share their x1s). This sets a precedent that should > discourage people from creating nonce lujvo with -sel- that are completely > superflous to the {se} compound, which is just a bad habit anyway in a > language that is supposed to be inflectionless. > > (Are there any precedents for {selbroda} != {se broda} already?) > > An interesting expression is {lo se selma'o be zo ui}, by the way, which with > this definition would be a precise way to say "the words of selma'o UI". > (Right now, this is usually expressed using {la'e}: {lo cmavo be la'e zo ui}.) > > Thoughts? > [...] Content analysis details: (0.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is freemail (mturniansky[at]gmail.com) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [209.85.216.61 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED No valid author signature, adsp_override is CUSTOM_MED -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 2.7 FRT_ROLEX BODY: ReplaceTags: Rolex -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.0 T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Daniel Brockman wrot= e: > The term "selma'o" (in both English and Lojban) actually has very little = to do > with cmavo. =A0It's used for any word, and we have selma'o like CMENE and= BRIVLA. > > Remarkably, {selma'o} doesn't even have a proper definition in jbovlaste. > I propose the following place structure: > > =A0 =A0selma'o: x1=3Dc2 is the grammatical class of the word x2=3Dc1 > =A0 =A0with role x3=3Dc3 in language x4=3Dc4. > > Note that I have dropped the reference to cmavo, and adapted the meaning > of the x3 to be the role of the selma'o rather than the meaning of the wo= rd. > > I like this for several reasons, the biggest one of course being that it > causes the word {selma'o} to make sense and be useful and intuitive. > > I also like the fact that this definition makes {selma'o} !=3D {se cmavo}= (though > they would still share their x1s). =A0This sets a precedent that should > discourage people from creating nonce lujvo with -sel- that are completel= y > superflous to the {se} compound, which is just a bad habit anyway in a > language that is supposed to be inflectionless. > > (Are there any precedents for {selbroda} !=3D {se broda} already?) > > An interesting expression is {lo se selma'o be zo ui}, by the way, which = with > this definition would be a precise way to say "the words of selma'o UI". > (Right now, this is usually expressed using {la'e}: {lo cmavo be la'e zo = ui}.) > > Thoughts? > Sorry, knee jerk reaction -- I dislike it. I think that lujvo of construction SE zei broda should be sacrosanct, and mean nothing more or less that "SE broda" doe. Using "selma'o" to describe "CMENE" and "BRIVLA" is just plain wrong and sloppy, in my opinion. --gejyspa --=20 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@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.