[lojban-beginners] Re: Reuse request

[gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>]

Please don't change anything in gismu definitions!
We may ignore some sumti place, use sumtcita for "by bond..." etc.
but don't change the existing rules.
In extreme cases let's just create new gismu in favor of elder ones
but this
would be something extraordinal.

The only thing I can accept in the nearest future is from Lojbanic
born
children (doi .robin. .a'o ta baza zasti vau .u'i)

On May 9, 4:25 pm, ianek <jane...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 2:12:55 PM UTC+2, xorxes wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:08 AM, Jonathan Jones  wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Jorge Llambías  wrote:
>
> > >> son-in-law would usually be tixspe ("nakni pazyspe", "male
> > >> offspring-spouse") would be a more exact translation, which is not
> > >> necessarily better.
>
> > > You know, I really, really dislike the use of a word meaning female to
> > > describe a male (and vice-versa),
>
> > Do you dislike "maternal grandfather" and "paternal grandmother" too?
>
> > >and not because it's prejudicial to
> > > homosexual relationships- although that is an excellent additional
> > reason,
> > > imo.
>
> > It's just a different grouping than in English. English "son-in-law"
> > groups the male spouses of the offspring in a single word, whatever
> > the sex of the offspring, while Lojban "tixspe" groups the spouses of
> > the female offspring in one word, whatever the sex of the spouses.
> > Both words allow for homosexual marriages, just different ones.
>
> > > At this point, "pazyspe" seems like the best option to me. I don't
> > honestly
> > > care about the lack of gender specification- we already know he's a guy.
>
> > Right, that's more general.
>
> > > So, if {ko'a tixspe ko'e} is {ko'a speni lo tixnu be ko'e}, what is
> > {ko'a
> > > bersa ko'e ki'u lodu'u speni lo ri panzi}?
>
> > But why should marrying someone have to make you the son of their
> > parents? You could even be older than their parents, which makes
> > calling yourself their son sound even more strange. Just because
> > English happens to use the same word for "son" and "son-in-law"
> > doesn't mean Lojban should.
>
> > > Also, why is it that all the familial gismu have a "by bond x3" except
> > bersa
> > > and tixnu? I hate it when I encounter exceptions like that.
>
> > Yes, it's annoying.
>
> So let's change it! I mean, we should gather complaints like that and make
> new versions of Lojban from time to time (once a couple of years?).
>
> If there are annoying things in Lojban and we know how to fix them, then we
> should stop complaining and do something! It's our language, there's nobody
> to stop us!
>
> I have similar thoughts about jbovlaste, but I'll better start another
> thread for that.
>
> mu'o mi'e ianek
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > I think from this point, I'm going to start /pretending/ they do have
> > the
> > > "by bond" x3. So, what's the lujvo for {ko'a bersa ko'e lo nunspe}?
>
> > That would be a stepson, right? Or is it a son-in-law? It depends on
> > whose marriage we are talking about.
>
> > > doi.xorxes. So, to make sure, spepa'u and spemamta are the correct
> > words?
>
> > For "patfu lo speni" and "mamta lo speni". Or you could use "sperirni"
> > for both if you don't want sex to be involved.
>
> > > Regarding #72: I'm not missing anything, right?
>
> > I don't think "lo se nanca" makes sense there.
>
> > mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.