Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 16:32:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Invent Yourself <xod@thestonecutters.net>
To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: fu'ivla for animals
In-Reply-To: <004801c2d85c$67b1eda0$a80210ac@catie.ac.cr>
Message-ID: <20030219162834.I40755-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Content-Length: 1009

On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, [iso-8859-1] =C1lvaro Vallejo wrote:

> coi,
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 04:29:44PM +0100, Philip Newton wrote:
> ...
> >> I think most of the words [for animals] will surely be fu'ivla
>
> fu'ivla is not totally clear for me. If we want to nominate animals, from
> what language are we going to loan words?
> Why can not these names be constructed as lujvo?


We tend to think of lujvo as representing concepts. But what's the concept
of a zebra? Should we simply describe it as a striped horse? But maybe a
horse is an unstriped zebra. What about molds and viruses and those stalky
things that grow on the ocean floor near volcanic vents?

So we've taken to using type-3 fu'ivla for creatures, and somewhere on the
wiki certain hard-working people have been compiling great lists of them.
I believe they've been using Latin as the source language.


--=20
Seventy-two city councils, including Philadelphia,
Austin, Chicago, Baltimore and Cleveland have
passed anti-war resolutions.