Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 02:33:31 -0400
From: Andrew Archibald <archibal@math.mcgill.ca>
To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: "biker gangs"
Message-ID: <20040414023331.W31434@fresco.Math.McGill.CA>
References: <200404140553.BAA05929@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <200404140553.BAA05929@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>; from mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA on Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 01:34:03AM -0400
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: 3415

On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 01:34:03AM -0400, der Mouse wrote:
> I was mulling over the sample discussed here a while back that, in its
> initial form, used "relxilma'e zekri girzu" to mean "biker gangs".

> Quite aside from using "relxilma'e" to mean "motorcycle" as distinct
> from "bicycle" (it seems to me that it really refers to both),

Well, in fact it was me that used it, and I did not attempt to use it
to mean "motorcycle but not bicycle"; I decided it was better to leave
it vague about which was meant, figuring out that most readers could
figure out that bicycle gangs are not normally very threatening.  I
also considered the possibility that some reader somewhere might be
amused by the ambiguity and decided I could permit this. 

>                                                                someone
> pointed out that "relxilma'e zekri girzu" actually means "cycle-crime
> group", not the desired "cycle crime-group", suggesting using something
> like "bo" or "ke".

This is a very fair correction.  Either {bo} or {ke} do the intended
job: grouping the tanru correctly. 

> It occurred to me that it also might work to say something like
> "(matra) relxilma'e zergri".  Now, I'm not sure if "zergri" is a valid
> lujvo (while there's no reason obvious to me why it wouldn't be, I'm
> hardly an expert), but is the basic approach - tying two fragments of a
> tanru together by converting them to a lujvo - reasonable?

Well, yes and no.  {zergri} has a different meaning from the tanru
{zekri girzu}.  {zergri} picks a specific meaning out of the vague
family of meanings associated with {zekri girzu}; the reader then has
to figure out which meaning is meant.  That's not difficult here, but
it suggests that you'll be using the word frequently; the difference
is a little like the difference between the French "motard" and 
"vilain a moto".  An English translation of {zergri} could be
something like "cartel" or "organizatsaya" instead of "organized
crime".  

So it would be changing the meaning, slightly, but would get the
meaning across.  I wouldn't say it's a general way to deal with tanru
grouping, as there are many much more unambiguous lujvo: 

{ceizda} from {cevni zdani}, God-house, has been chosen to mean
Heaven (i.e., where God lives, I think) but could have been "holy
sanctuary", church, monastery...

{mampa'u} from {mamta patfu}, means maternal grandfather; the tanru
could perfectly well refer to a father that does motherly things
(breastfeed, perhaps). 

Even here, {zekri girzu} could mean a group that it is criminal to
belong to (some association of Holocaust deniers, perhaps? at least
under Canadian law), but {zergri} picks a specific meaning (even if
you don't say what it is).  So it might be better, it might be worse,
but it's not the same. 

Of course, lujvo come with the disconcerting possibility that they may
omit grouping elements and other less important parts of the tanru
they are derived from.  This leads me to a question.  First of all,
for normal lujvo (made without mangling the tanru first), the CLL is
unabmiguous in stating that where choices are possible in the
lujvo-making algorithm, all choices have the same meaning.  When the
tanru is mangled first, there are choices about how it is mangled.  Do
these lead to equivalent lujvo?  I hope not, as this would allow lujvo
that did not share any letters to be used interchangeably. 


Andrew