Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Pr2Nv-0008Vf-0R; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:03:10 -0800 Received: by gwb20 with SMTP id 20sf4355137gwb.16 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:03:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version :in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=39IO4VRswypBQqsR+6yYupEw8rkC65wVaB11MQBdEM4=; b=TB9AFL946mYFhFOz9vg4pEMr2yvT1SxnQ5HbFC2GYoWxwA3aXH5ZokgT7ha1mUE9Xm JqC/154Tvd6i7koDr+Nuhn+j6DpVwBMpmwRhiGF2Iz+W5vX9uV/sqZWY138wblO4rYyO DCUPxSmA6tEyRMXxOPSRI2W688mP7YzgaiAVs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=TJmAY+oDS/t0tUVTFjAeEDUpqmmsRiq8mNJLj2Psz9xuWvKL//w+D49AVvFAqHNw4C AbZ3P24mTsDroPtbvnVWg3DZyLQECjyIK8VXfkcACf5/LHa5LO6FqFir2jLr8D6yL+vz XXLVko6Z6ClpJY046RcfGLkcq01fEqzKC6N4A= Received: by 10.91.118.3 with SMTP id v3mr6405agm.49.1298181770244; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:02:50 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.200.3 with SMTP id eu3ls3925438ibb.1.p; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:02:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.16.131 with SMTP id o3mr19981iba.18.1298181769280; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:02:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.16.131 with SMTP id o3mr19980iba.18.1298181769225; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:02:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m30si857653ibu.2.2011.02.19.22.02.49 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:02:49 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.172 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.172; Received: by iym1 with SMTP id 1so4988161iym.3 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:02:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.191.129 with SMTP id dm1mr55615ibb.173.1298181769075; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:02:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.199.141 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:02:28 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Luke Bergen Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 01:02:28 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] lujvo making help request To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.172 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016363b85a0332926049cb07f2b Content-Length: 5921 --0016363b85a0332926049cb07f2b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 When one english word is as overloaded as "agnostic" seems to be, it makes me question if such a thing should be expressible in lojban with a single word. On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > In tanru yes, but not in a lujvo.The meaning of lujvo is NOT defined as > exactly the meaning of the tanru formed from the valsi of the component > rafsi. > > Especially with ready long lujvo, it is not only permissible, but > encouraged to leave out non-vital rafsi. > > Sent from my Android. > > On Feb 19, 2011 9:40 PM, "Ian Johnson" wrote: > > I think they are, because that other thing, the thing I described, is a > relevant possibility in this discussion in general. Plus, {cevni zasti djuno > tolcu'i krici} and {cevni zasti tolcu'i djuno krici} yield lujvo of > essentially the same length--you don't need ke/ke'e or bo. > > > > mu'o mi'e .latros. > > On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Jonathan Jones > wrote: > >> > >> > I forgot that part in the lujvo. Oops. >> > >> > Right, (((god existence)(impossible knowing))belief).... >> >> -- >> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Lojban Beginners" group... >> > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lojban Beginners" g... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lojban Beginners" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. --0016363b85a0332926049cb07f2b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When one english word is as overloaded as "agnostic" seems to be,= it makes me question if such a thing should be=A0expressible=A0in lojban w= ith a single word.

On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 a= t 12:05 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:

In tanru yes, but not in a lujvo.The mea= ning of lujvo is NOT defined as exactly the meaning of the tanru formed fro= m the valsi of the component rafsi.

Especially with ready long lujvo, it is not only permissible, but encour= aged to leave out non-vital rafsi.

Sent from my Android.

On Feb 19, 2011 9:40 PM,= "Ian Johnson" <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:

I think they are= , because that other thing, the thing I described, is a relevant possibilit= y in this discussion in general. Plus, {cevni zasti djuno tolcu'i krici= } and {cevni zasti tolcu'i djuno krici} yield lujvo of essentially the = same length--you don't need ke/ke'e or bo.



mu'o mi'e .latros.

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>= I forgot that part in the lujvo. Oops.
>
> Right, (((god existence)(= impossible knowing))belief)....

--

> You received this message because yo= u are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group...=


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google G= roups "Lojban Beginners" g...

=

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+un= subscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den.
--0016363b85a0332926049cb07f2b--