DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type         :content-transfer-encoding;        b=VlzNSxGXpvOz1Eri+kAiaVGgCJB1tTv0RcMPDY5dw5aqn0G8lyG+CZ1KR7nuHavlLn         QeWom12l/aUquJgXekzFkm0J+HBsu+P8t1/mzTGb+mAaR7FhJGryFZOPsYt733iRgSMK         QT2nGDqSC3oLgY0Zis00+nJO0SrbKzFgXV4fU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <770382631003100732q4c29c83em14bf94bdb9344e99@mail.gmail.com>
References: <770382631003082147r56b269a5sde4b108b53beccf1@mail.gmail.com>	 <4de8c3931003090344i5aa85659r4e9d50523ac1ddd7@mail.gmail.com>	 <770382631003100732q4c29c83em14bf94bdb9344e99@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:51:55 +0000
Message-ID: <4de8c3931003101351w18e76ed6n81ab40f3c822a647@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: looking for new name
From: tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com>
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Length: 2523

On 10 March 2010 15:32, Nadeem Waqif <nadeem.waqif@gmail.com> wrote:
> would like to understand the shortening and compounding process better. if
> im to understand correctly the compound words sajyfavji'es, sajyfavjix and
> so on, would be understandable as the very same concept without confusion.

Those items of the name word class have no actual semantic value other
than what could be associated from their resemblance to those of the
content word class. Whereas "sajyfavji'e" is a word consisting of
dictionary-defined meaningful morphemes, "sajyfavji'es" is just a
string of letters that looks like "sajyfavji'e".


> favsajymiv as evolving-consious-organism is easier to say. would "zi'eful
> favsajymiv" be a correct way of writing the full name together or with a dot
> in the middle?

"favsajymiv" should be "favysajmiv" ("vs" is an invalid consonant
pair, requiring the buffer vowel "y"; "jm" is valid).

If the name is meant to have two parts, probably "zi'eful.favysejmiv"
with an inbetween dot is the safest option in the parser-oriented,
formal areas of Lojbanistan. But people (including myself) often opts
to omit dots for aesthetic or pragmatic reasons (e.g. "the
letter-space is enough for us humans to see the division of words").


> for a simpler first name "free" would "zifr" be the name-word form?

Yes. Also "zif".


> sanji meaning aware is really close to my surname waqif which means one who
> is aware (of whatever has been mentioned earlier but used here to imply
> mystically omniscient),  what then is the name-word form of sanji alone?

The major principle of name-words is that they end with a consonant.
So for example you could just add a (Lojbanic) consonant of your
choice and make "sanjik". But if the relevance to the original "sanji"
is important, "sanj" by removing the final vowel would be better,
because "sanj" is one of the actual (non-independent) shapes "sanji"
takes on to combine with other words into a compound. Another such
non-independent shape of "sanji" is "saj", which is even shorter and
happens to be of the name-word form.


> how would one refer to the concept "lacking awareness"

 sajycau (aware-lack)
 kamsajycau (awareness-lack)
 kamsajycri (awareness-lose)
 nalsanji (not-aware)

> "lacking control but aware".

 naltrosanji (not-control-aware)
 troflisanji (control-fail-aware)
 kasyjvesanji (chaos-and-aware)

The meanings of these compounds would be but ambiguous unless you
define their place structures (the arrangement of the arguments).


mu'o