Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Sun, 20 May 2007 23:51:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hq1jb-0001U4-K7 for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Sun, 20 May 2007 23:51:12 -0700 Received: from web56411.mail.re3.yahoo.com ([216.252.111.90]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hq1jY-0001Tx-PL for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Sun, 20 May 2007 23:51:11 -0700 Received: (qmail 66067 invoked by uid 60001); 21 May 2007 06:51:02 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=bRGxZ/P2+KAriV/qRkv7l+uwpozPppy13x0/LmjLyHKXh0c0do0jY5owpXnW8YRy6CEKTcLnX56Qaryi0hCluvL7Yx5YUyGs5zP4Qxhz0is92aWT7L/4QxldZRFUzXsJALOFxqhpcTVK4T5h/ClO+sWG8HN5Ks3XPLOCRdj1EZ8=; X-YMail-OSG: 0PcpjeQVM1l9J9sgjDpQy0jjuB_qTBJZDigXlejnuQeh19qIeFcqAO9IHTlHOi5lrXKSXRoB0zOyfgj4QRgoCOkr.n_iLzuWdwbb2Bs1XpHQg7Kjpc6pFARxcSwwcxHM Received: from [75.0.152.46] by web56411.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 20 May 2007 23:51:02 PDT Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 23:51:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Nathaniel Krause Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: distinction between gismu & cmavo To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <2f91285f0705201557o75faa50avf0eaedd5f309881@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1382186535-1179730262=:65918" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <419009.65918.qm@web56411.mail.re3.yahoo.com> X-Spam-Score: 1.4 X-Spam-Score-Int: 14 X-Spam-Bar: + X-archive-position: 4556 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: nathanielkrause@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 4136 --0-1382186535-1179730262=:65918 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Vid Sintef wrote: Isn't an affix something to be "added" to a base word and alter its original grammatical nature (like the English "-er" in "longer" or the Czech "nej-" in " nejhorší" or the Japanese "sa-" in "samayou")? If it is that rafsi are to be "joined" together to make longer words, mustn't they be certain "root" words themselves from which that resulting longer words' meanings would derive, possessing proper semantic essences even though they are not to be spoken as single words. A rafsi is not a word. If you say try to say a rafsi by itself, it means something else. For instance, "-coi-" is a rafsi which means "deep", but, if you say "coi" by itself, it means "hello". "coitca" is a lujvo meaning, perhaps, "deep city", but you can't use "coi" and "tca" separately with the same meanings. If it is a convention to not use rafsi individually, still that doesn't stop them from possessing the nature of base words. You said gismu are "root words" because they are the roots of meaning; rafsi too are the roots of meaning, aren't they? If not, how could we possibly read the meaning of a lujvo which are made from rafsi? rafsi have meanings by themselves, and therefore they are words. Rafsi are the roots of meaning, but they are not root words because they are not words. They do not have meaning by themselves. It is not simply a convention which prevents rafsi from being used in isolation. Cheers, mi'e .sen. --------------------------------- Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. --0-1382186535-1179730262=:65918 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Vid Sintef <picos.picos@gmail.com> wrote:
Isn't an affix something to be "added" to a base word and alter its original grammatical nature (like the English "-er" in "longer" or the Czech "nej-" in " nejhorší" or the Japanese "sa-" in "samayou")? If it is that rafsi are to be "joined" together to make longer words, mustn't they be certain "root" words themselves from which that resulting longer words' meanings would derive, possessing proper semantic essences even though they are not to be spoken as single words.
A rafsi is not a word. If you say try to say a rafsi by itself, it means something else. For instance, "-coi-" is a rafsi which means "deep", but, if you say "coi" by itself, it means "hello". "coitca" is a lujvo meaning, perhaps, "deep city", but you can't use "coi" and "tca" separately with the same meanings.

If it is a convention to not use rafsi individually, still that doesn't stop them from possessing the nature of base words. You said gismu are "root words" because they are the roots of meaning; rafsi too are the roots of meaning, aren't they? If not, how could we possibly read the meaning of a lujvo which are made from rafsi? rafsi have meanings by themselves, and therefore they are words.
Rafsi are the roots of meaning, but they are not root words because they are not words. They do not have meaning by themselves. It is not simply a convention which prevents rafsi from being used in isolation.

Cheers,

mi'e .sen.

Don't pick lemons.
See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. --0-1382186535-1179730262=:65918--