From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRDc363lBBoEQYeruQ@googlegroups.com Tue Oct 05 11:35:31 2010 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P3CMI-0005qV-Bx; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:35:31 -0700 Received: by wyb40 with SMTP id 40sf1766792wyb.16 for ; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:35:17 -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=NuzthaV8vfTVYiFyD6g9kdeBeP2tizibLVvuajZoSbg=; b=yKzKZehAY/w9pFKjp8djZ/Dantmx/B2taecDrFaJZkI7jovZnmUC5ywsXx67rT3Zzf Opvhep4VvnyUK646EMmKoBuD4g65jNdEotp2m6hej44wsgDVNPA1ridKRcBv1zmxjShX HKrxH+ZLc4GhZDiIo+ynVck/T+urY2IUgs8Pg= 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=J5xA3YjZ1ReUfR12Rij8T7ntusDmruA5dhrJonsv+TZRSOyFl9OvmPCcHawaHzTuK8 AV9dAOLThnU/yRG8/CNEUtbz8OtumgW1zYDaF284YkRx+xnV0Jw+7xa8hz8n31ZtDY7C Nt4+Y9iNIae1CxQyAwPZqF6up1vKBYyK81vBo= Received: by 10.216.145.90 with SMTP id o68mr2166291wej.23.1286303708268; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:35:08 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.139.159 with SMTP id e31ls2168474wbu.0.p; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:35:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.207.209 with SMTP id fz17mr461588wbb.27.1286303706875; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:35:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.207.209 with SMTP id fz17mr461587wbb.27.1286303706839; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:35:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com (mail-ww0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id q13si2787877wbs.0.2010.10.05.11.35.05; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:35:05 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.53 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.53; Received: by mail-ww0-f53.google.com with SMTP id 33so1593976wwc.22 for ; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:35:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.136.140 with SMTP id r12mr9321242wbt.193.1286303697556; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:34:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.145.130 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 11:34:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201010011823.25227.phma@phma.optus.nu> <4CA76670.50601@lojban.org> Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 15:34:57 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] la za'e filjvocedra (The Age of Easy Lujvo) From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@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 On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Luke Bergen wrote: > oh that's sweet. =A0That'd take forever to memorize. =A0I have a new miss= ion in > life. =A0Define lujvo that no other language has a word for yet. =A0And I= shall > call this activity:=A0nunynonbaupo'evlafi'i Presumably that's from "nu finti lo valsi poi no bangu cu ponse (ke'a)". Let's set aside the question of whether languages can own any words. The major problem I have with the structure of that lujvo is how to get the "nonbaupo'e" part from "no bangu cu ponse (ke'a)". I'm not saying it's wrong, only that we don't really have any rules for constructing lujvo out of whole bridi. All our rules really boil down to reducing everything to two part lujvo. My first interpretation for "nonbau" would be from "bangu be no da", something like "x1 is a language with no speakers", not from "no bangu". And a "nonbaupo'e" would be the owner of such a language. "nonbaupo'evla" could then be "x1 is a word meaning 'owner of a language with no speakers' " and then your lujvo would be "x1 is an event of creating words meaning 'owner of a language with no speakers'". But as I said, we don't really have conventions for many-component lujvo, since they are so cumbersome that nobody uses them. So if what you want is clarity, it is better to avoid long lujvo. For purposes of obfuscation they can be rather useful though. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=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.