[jbovlaste] Re: Esther Chapter 2

["A. PIEKARSKI" <totus@rogers.com>]

----- Original Message ----
> From: Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com>
> To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
> Sent: Wed, October 14, 2009 2:41:19 PM
> Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: Esther Chapter 2
> 
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 1:26 PM, A. PIEKARSKI wrote:
> 
> >> >
> >> > 3) {speme'a}
> >> >
> >> > m1=s1 is a concubine, with lower rank than m2 by the amount of m4 ranks,
> >> belonging to s2 under tradition s3.
> >> >
> >>
> >>   No.  I have it me'aspe, not speme'a (as you have here)  for a
> >> reason.  I think the important thing is that it's a wife, not that
> >> it's a lesser thing.
> >>
> >>   m1=s1 is a concubine/lesser spouse of s2 under law/custom/convention s3
> >>
> >
> > But isn't this the same situation that we discussed with xorxes for words like
> > {selteptce}, {stanycma}, and plinycma?
> 
>   Which, if you recall, I vociferously debated him on "plinycma" (I
> have the whole thread save, if you need me to rehash it), 

Please send me the address of the thread.  I agree that your approach is consistent 
with CLL.  However there must be some basis for what xorxes proposes, so perhaps  
I should revisit it.

totus