True, I'm just saying that caution is in order. Sometimes english words are loaded with tons of meaning from connotation. Sometimes it's best to make the lujvo a reasonable length and then just define it however you want.For example, "email" could be described as {lerfu poi benji ke'a fu lo kibro}. But rather than making a lujvo like {kibybejlerfu} we say screw it, just call it {samymri} and define it how you please.Remember, the rafsi chosen for a lujvo are supposed to provide a decent hint at what the definition is, but at the end of the day, the only thing that matters is the definition.Case in point: nikyge'uIn all honesty I hope to see more lujvo like this. It's about time that lojban started forging ahead with original words and ideas and stop worrying solely about having a word for every nuance of every english idea that we can come up with. And don't take this one personally .arpis., I've been harping on this one for a while.On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 10:17 AM, .arpis. <rpglover64+jbobau@gmail.com> wrote:Well, I see no reason why one very precise sense of the word shouldn't be expressible in lojban in a single word.On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
When one english word is as overloaded as "agnostic" seems to be, it makes me question if such a thing should be expressible in lojban with a single word.
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
In tanru yes, but not in a lujvo.The meaning of lujvo is NOT defined as exactly the meaning of the tanru formed from the valsi of the component rafsi.
Especially with ready long lujvo, it is not only permissible, but encouraged to leave out non-vital rafsi.
Sent from my Android.
On Feb 19, 2011 9:40 PM, "Ian Johnson" <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
I think they are, because that other thing, the thing I described, is a relevant possibility in this discussion in general. Plus, {cevni zasti djuno tolcu'i krici} and {cevni zasti tolcu'i djuno krici} yield lujvo of essentially the same length--you don't need ke/ke'e or bo.
mu'o mi'e .latros.On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> Right, (((god existence)(impossible knowing))belief)....>
> I forgot that part in the lujvo. Oops.
>--> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" g...--
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.
--
mu'o mi'e .arpis.