From: "komfo,amonan" <komfoamonan@gmail.com>
To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:56:09 PM
Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: jbovlaste new entries
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 5:40 PM, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote:
Pierre Abbat scripsit:
> Then there's "natmi". Is there any difference between gugde and natmi,
> besides that a gugde has a land?A gugde is a sovereign state. [...]
The problem is that there are degrees of sovereignity, and futhermore whether a state considers itself 'sovereign' or not is subjective and largely an emotional issue . No state is completely sovereign (except perhaps North Korea) because even by joining the UN, it surrenders some of its sovereignity by agreeing to certain international laws and conventions. To some Welsh people, Wales may be a gugde, but in reality it probably has less sovereignity than the average Canadian province whic
h does not consider itself sovereign at all. In Switzerland, four cantons consider themselves to be sovereign although in reality they are no more sovereign than the remaining ones. So while the world may lojbanically consider them to be vipygu'e, they may consider themselves gugde. But that is a problem for political scientists, and not for lojban.
Wait. Then what is the difference between a {jecta} & a {gugde}? FWIW In my thinking, Wales, FWIW, qualifies as a {gugde} but not a {jecta} (& did so even before the Welsh Assembly).As I understand it, jecta is the political organization of a gugde, or any of its components.mu'o mi'e andrus