It seems like the writers of the CLL originally did really just think of lujvo as being shortened forms of tanru who have been given an explicit meaning instead of the vague meaning that tanru have.
While I fully agree and support that lujvo do not need to be based on tanru, still I would suggest not to walk too much on the wild side.
I would still prefer to start with a tanru (if possible) and then move toward more complex sentence as a base for a new lujvo.
Sure, I can make a lujvo and give it whatever meaning and place structure I please but how good would it be?
I think you can tell that a lujvo is a good one if you are able to guess the meaning.
{rolcatra} seems rather good to me : {ro} + {catra} -> "all" "killer" -> "killer of all" (omincide) -> {ko'a catra ro ko'e ko'i}
I should really do an effort to think something differnt.
remod.
--
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.