[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[jbovlaste] Re: le'axru dinsauru





From: "komfo,amonan" <komfoamonan@gmail.com>
To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 3:23:19 PM
Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: le'axru dinsauru

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:32 PM, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote:
Pierre Abbat scripsit:

> but I vacillate between "-o" and "-u" for fu'ivla from Latin and Greek second
> declension nouns.

I'd go with -o, which is the historical outcome in the western Romance languages,
and so will be more familiar to more people.

Another reason in favor of "-o" is that it was the vowel used in Latin before it evolved to "-u". ei mi jai galfi le fu'ivla be fi'e mi be'o pe la uikipedias 
 
Actually, do we really want to sound like hundreds of 'constructed' languages that are based on the Romance languages?  Good reason to choose 'u' ;)

> > 2) dinsauru(dinosaur)
> >
> > x1 is a dinosaur of type x2


Isn't the x2 of organism brivla usually "species/breed"?
 
But dinosaurs are just too broad a category (further up the heirarchy) for x2 to be species/breed.
They are a 'superorder' with suborders which themselves are divided into infraorders, then families.
Also they are a subdivision of an infraclass.  In other words, it's just too complicated and that is why
I suggested just 'type'.
 
totus