From lojban+bncCMvjp-TQBRDPraDgBBoEfSqmKA@googlegroups.com Thu Jun 03 13:56:00 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OKHSG-0002dr-29; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:56:00 -0700 Received: by yxd39 with SMTP id 39sf336815yxd.16 for ; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:55:49 -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:received:mime-version:sender :received:from:date:message-id:subject: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=99yg3aYAeVwG168buOdguzw0UXVs8XoYON2cIwQQQwE=; b=lL4uWj3cxu0H7CFV3Ao/LGRvTDV7RC2xgLaKg/5FJ0ilGTKHcrDeaJMpzvmQFro9YM gE9FM0gCgpwTcsEzBeQvdagfziGILdIUGjrgCzY5NbuO8rSU1Jq8RuE/NFxDJkJ2xsAe FV7OOJ01T7VZ4LBNSNNWqaBOugMsOoXk8wUI4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id :subject: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=RH+P55JbMR0hvGG/v5eZkrTmncc4EweOi8oe8xPRfcVKIPxRB5BV4K/TWGVA0fJ1xu FCEcCQh07cQ9u66kO6bOBG546mlHWWKFbKQav0AnqNt3XxbCkD04yp2fujLOoh/PSPRf kmKeQkjsUE8jSFqHkoTEmMq31rOy/nAOH2LQY= Received: by 10.101.180.37 with SMTP id h37mr375582anp.4.1275598543922; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:55:43 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.148.2 with SMTP id a2ls2205608ano.1.p; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:55:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.243.26 with SMTP id q26mr3159141anh.18.1275598543106; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:55:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.243.26 with SMTP id q26mr3159140anh.18.1275598543076; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:55:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id z17si314485ank.5.2010.06.03.13.55.41; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:55:42 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of dbrockman@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.172 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.213.172; Received: by yxt33 with SMTP id 33so342528yxt.17 for ; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:55:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.10.8 with SMTP id n8mr11322034ani.30.1275598541819; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 13:55:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.100.249.14 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Jun 2010 13:55:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Daniel Brockman Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 22:55:21 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Neutral words To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of dbrockman@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.172 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=dbrockman@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: dbrockman@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: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 We are compiling a list of selma'o ordered by whether or not they have neutral members: http://openetherpad.org/neutral-lojban-words The goal is to identify selma'o that lack neutral members even though it would make sense for them to exist, and then define experimental cmavo to fill these gaps. Neutral selma'o members are useful all-purpose linguistic tools, and fit very well into the rest of the Lojban language. So far, we have added {xo'e} to jbovlaste as the neutral PA. According to xalbo, this word has been suggested before. http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/xo'e The next selma'o we want to tackle is LAhE. A neutral LAhE would be useful in practice as a substitute for {zo'e pe ...}, and as a substitute for {tu'a ...} when you don't want an abstraction. I suggest {tu'oi} as the neutral LAhE. It is similar to {tu'a}, which is very good mnemonically, and it has an "o", which makes it fit rather well with {co'e}, {do'e}, {zo'e}, and {xo'e}. In addition, it is similar to {tu'o}, which is a neutral-ish word. (But {tu'oi} and {tu'o} would not occur in the same contexts, so I don't think there are any collision problems.) Thoughts on all this? -- 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.