Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 11:41:34 -0400
From: turnip <turnip@bcpl.net>
To: "Jared Angell" <angell.jared@gmail.com>
Cc: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: geodesic dome
Message-ID: <472A43A6@webmail.bcpl.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Length: 1097

>===== Original Message From "Jared Angell" <angell.jared@gmail.com> =====
>So 'rekyboldi'u' could be used to describe the class of all geodesic
>domes...but now I have learned that the type of geodome i was referring to
>is the specific type made of triangles (and what if I mean the type with
>windows, does this then make the word used even more complex?)
>
>Does anyone guess my game here yet (I suspect Bob does and that he has
>already got the next move planned out)?  Because this exercise has already
>succeeded.
>
    And yes, I know this thread  has already been done to death, but of course 
the answer would be either "cibjgatai rekyboldi'u", of if we used lojbab's 
place structure of rekyboldi'u, then "rekyboldi'u be fo cibjgatai"  As to your 
"game" -- if you are implying there is something somehow "wrong" with having 
to use more words when more specificity is required, then even English does 
that.  And "geodesic dome with a triangular tesselation" takes even longer to 
say then "rekyboldi'u be fo cibjgatai",  so I don't understand your point.

              --gejsypa