I disagree. I suggest that SEL- lujvo are always jvajvo, no cimjvo.The same goes for -gau, -zu'e, -selja'e, some other rafsi.--2014-09-09 17:53 GMT+04:00 And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>:Ilmen, On 09/09/2014 14:15:
I don't like very much the idea of using the sel- rafsi in a
non-compositional way, for making lujvo of the form {selbroda} whose
meaning cannot be derived from {se broda}. It seems there's a pretty
wide implicit agreement that the sel/ter/vel/xel rafsi should be
regular (semantically compositional).
That dislike and agreement strike me as not very rational. The principal grammatical function of lujvo relative to phrases is to signal noncompositionality -- a sense other than, and typically more specific than, the sense of the unlujvoized phrasal counterpart. A secondary function of lujvo is that sometimes they're shorter, but given that brevity is only a marginal consideration in Lojban design, the key grammatical characteristic of lujvohood is noncompositionality, with the rafsi having merely a kind of mnemonic function.
--And.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.