[lojban-beginners] Re: Why no "about" brivla?

[ianek <janek37@gmail.com>]

While having antonyms ({citno} = {to'e laldo} etc.) is okay and
synonyms with switched places ({xabju} = {ze zdani} etc.) are
acceptable, having two gismu where one's terbri is a prefix of the
other's is just plain silly. Why not add all the new gismu for other
prefixes too? Like "x1 is a book", "x1 is a book containing work x2"
etc.
The gismu keywords/definitions aren't sacred, there are many known
misleading ones. I guess this applies to {srana} too.

mu'o mi'e ianek

On 2 Gru, 16:47, Jacob Errington <nicty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, I define {srana} in lojban as follows:
> {.i lo ka ce'u srana ce'u cu ka ce'u bu'a ce'u}
> And actually being able to say *what* that bu'a is is what led me to a post
> much earlier about "srana3", which indeed, I now realise, would make
> {srana} essentially identical to {ckini}.
> (With a srana3, the definition becomes {.i lo ka ce'u srana ce'u cu ka ce'u
> ce'u me'au ce'u})
>
> Thus, I currently believe that srana can be defined in terms of ckini as
> such:
> {.i lo ka ce'u srana ce'u cu ka ce'u ce'u ckini lo ka co'e}
> Things that are relevant to each other are simply related by an obvious
> relationship.
>
> .i mi'e la tsani mu'o
>
> On 2 December 2012 08:02, Jonathan Jones <eyeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 2:48 AM, la gleki <gleki.is.my.n...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> On Sunday, December 2, 2012 1:32:48 PM UTC+4, aionys wrote:
>
> >>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:03 AM, la gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> On Sunday, December 2, 2012 11:15:01 AM UTC+4, aionys wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 12:00 AM, la gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On Sunday, December 2, 2012 10:50:42 AM UTC+4, aionys wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 11:09 PM, la gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> On Sunday, December 2, 2012 1:30:39 AM UTC+4, aionys wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:17 AM, tijlan <jbot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>> On 1 December 2012 12:09, ianek <jan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> > This is just what {se srana} or {selra'a} is.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> An about, a thematic focus, is more specific than that. cfika2,
> >>>>>>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>>>> instance, may be as much relevant to cfika1 as cfika3 may be -- a
> >>>>>>>>>> work
> >>>>>>>>>> of fiction cu srana both its plot and its author (and possibly
> >>>>>>>>>> many
> >>>>>>>>>> other things). Consider:
>
> >>>>>>>>>> la .alis. cfika sera'a lo nixli
>
> >>>>>>>>>> This doesn't necessarily say that the plot revolves around a girl
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> it could as well be saying the work is dedicated to a girl.
>
> >>>>>>>>> I'm sorry, I don't see how anything based on {srana} could
> >>>>>>>>> possibly mean "dedicated to". You'll have to explain.
>
> >>>>>>>> Well, may be it's not that something is wrong with
> >>>>>>>> {sera'a/pe/srana} but rather wrong usage and/or glossing.
>
> >>>>>>>> *srana x1 pertains to/is germane/relevant to/concerns/is
> >>>>>>>> related/associated with/is about x2.*
> >>>>>>>> *ckini  x1 is related to/associated with/akin to x2 by
> >>>>>>>> relationship x3.*
>
> >>>>>>>> If we arbitrarily chose parts of those definitions we'd get
> >>>>>>>> *  srana x1 is relevant to x2
> >>>>>>>>   ckini  x1 is relevant to x2
> >>>>>>>> *
> >>>>>>>> which is nonsense.
>
> >>>>>>> ckini wouldn't be that. For one thing, you left out the x3, and for
> >>>>>>> another, it isn't "relevant", it's "related". The Cold War isn't relevant
> >>>>>>> to WWII, but it is related (by being a direct result of it).
>
> >>>>>> Sorry, it should be
> >>>>>> *  srana x1 is releted to x2*
> >>>>>> *  ckini  x1 is related to x2 by relationship x3*
>
> >>>>> Well, by that definition, srana is {ckini fi zi'o}, which makes them
> >>>>> synonyms in the same way that litru is to klama (litru = {klama zi'o zi'o}).
>
> >>>> Haven't you read my previous post? I mean that choosing words from full
> >>>> definitions ARBITRARILY can lead to this result which is nonsense.
> >>>> ju'o it's all bad glossing.
> >>>> I suggest that srana refers to topic and ckini means "to be associated
> >>>> with".
> >>>> to dedicate is {finfriti}, {tecu'u} etc.
>
> >>> No, ko'a srana ko'e means that ko'a is relevant to ko'e, i.e. ko'a has
> >>> something to do with ko'e.
>
> >>> While it is true that the topic of something is pertinent, something
> >>> which is pertinent is not necessarily the topic.
>
> >> Then what is your opinion about my first post? Is it true that "topic"
> >> brivla has right to exist on it's own?
>
> > My opinion is that sera'a serves the purpose. As I said, "that which is
> > pertinent to A" is a superset of "the topic of A".
>
> >>  Roosevelt is pertinent to the Great Depression, but he is most certainly
> >>> /not/ the topic of it.
>
> >>>>  (Btw, in my view, zi'o doesn't say that there is no such thing as
> >>>>> whatever place it's in, but just that it's not important. For example,
> >>>>> {ko'a klama zi'o zi'o ...} doesn't mean there /isn't/ an origin or
> >>>>> destination, it just means that they don't matter. Dissenters should use
> >>>>> zo'e instead.)
>
> >>>> I think the CLL says almost the same.
>
> >>>>>>>> If {srana} really gives us thematic role then all the other "is
> >>>>>>>> relevant to" meanings can be assigned to {ckini/seki'i}.
>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> mu'o mi'e .aionys.
>
> >>>>> .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
> >>>>> (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
>
> >>>>>  --
> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>> Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
> >>>> To view this discussion on the web visithttps://groups.google.com/d/**
> >>>> msg/lojban-beginners/-/**UZopTp21hiIJ<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban-beginners/-/UZopTp21hiIJ>
> >>>> .
>
> >>>> To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.**com.
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginne...@**
> >>>> googlegroups.com.
>
> >>>> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/**
> >>>> group/lojban-beginners?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en>
> >>>> .
>
> >>> --
> >>> mu'o mi'e .aionys.
>
> >>> .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
> >>> (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
>
> >>>  --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> >> "Lojban Beginners" group.
> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
> >>https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban-beginners/-/kQJ2iFS5UZ4J.
>
> >> 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.
>
> > --
> > mu'o mi'e .aionys.
>
> > .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
> > (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
>
> >  --
> > 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.

-- 
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.