On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 01:43:07AM -0800, la gleki wrote:
> This question appeared in the russian casnu stuzi.
Sorry for ignoring your question, though it's an interesting one and
I'm not sure pier's solution works out..
But I was confused about your usage of {casnu stuzi} for "discussion site/page",
for {stuzi} clearly does not refer to "site" in the "page" sense, but
"site" in a geometrical sense.
However, /who the hell/ came up with {samci'ejudri} for "website"? {ba'e cfipu}
(confusing) Even something like {te ciska} (something someone can write on/to)
is _much_ better. {samci'ejudri} covers aspects of websites which are very different
from what people mean by the word. I know there was a discussion about that
quite some time ago, but is there some simple way of expressing "content bearer"
(which could be combined with {kibro}) or some other way to express this
(probably something generalizing the meaning of physical page )...
To be perfectly honest, any "jargon" term (and yes, forum is a jargon term as far as Lojban is concerned, I think) created from lujvo will either be very wet (I love saying that, from {cimjvo}) or extremely long. In both cases, the benefits of the compositionality of lujvo lessens considerably.
This is what motivated me to define a whole pile of {jvozi'evla} for computer terms. Morphologically speaking, they're fu'ivla, but they're made from rafsi with vowels and consonants chopped out and hyphens added in. There's some recognizability of the components, but it's slight, just enough to hint at the meaning. The advantage of using zi'evla is that the place structure can be pretty arbitrary, unlike with lujvo, where (depending on how strictly the rules are followed) places must be included and in a certain order.
.i mi'e la tsani mu'o
.i sei jmina se'u .u'u mi spuda lo nu tavla fi na'e bo lo selsnu kei lo nu ca'o tavla fi na'e bo lo selsnu
[P.S. I apologize for responding to offtopic talking with continuing to talk about offtopic stuff.]