[lojban-beginners] Re: le vinji vs lo vinji

["Vid Sintef" <picos.picos@gmail.com>]

On 8/13/07, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> If the child wanted to say, for example, "I like theme parks with airplanes", then the correct choice would be {lo}, because he would not have any particular airplanes in mind.

Even if what he wanted to refer to did not really fit for the place
structure of {vinji}? I mean, what if the child asked someone about
this "airplane": {fi mo seljakne cu ba vinji ti mi}?

> Using {vinji} for such things is not a lie. A lie is a false statement made
> with intent to deceive.
> If the child asks {tu mo} pointing to the airplane
> ride, and the adult says {tu pinji}, they are not lying, they are using the
> word {pinji} in a wider sense than its core meaning.

zo'o
But, again, what if the child then questions: {pinji ma}? The adult
won't be likely to answer that. If it's the case that the adult
seriously thinks that the object over there *is* a penis yet
truthfully doesn't know "whose penis that is" (i.e. how to fill in the
x2 sumti of that object, the {pinji}), that's fine, he is not at least
lying to the child by uttering {lo pinji} (although he would probably
need some psychiatric counseling); but if he had already known that
such an argument (the x2 place of {pinji}) was impossible for the
object to have since the object wasn't really the x1 place of {pinji},
then he must have lied to the child, mustn't he?

> > Will the plate next to that toy ride, written
> > for children, in a lojbanistan, have to be saying {le vinji} or {lo
> > vinji}?
>
> Probably {la vinji}, if that's the name of the ride.

Can that plate also be saying {fi'i ko se vinji ti}, while it cannot
be more specific like {fi'i ko se vinji ti lo banli seljakne} since
there isn't such a thing which really propells the ride into the sky?

mu'o mi'e vid