Re: [lojban-beginners] Why is CAhA a tense/modal?

[tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com>]

On 23 April 2011 14:16, MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com> wrote:
> Circularity is avoidable. That's the whole point of Anna Wierzbicka's
> Natural Semantic Metalanguage, which assumes a small number (~62) of 'words'
> that can't be defined in terms of simpler words.

Yes, such primes may exist. However, editors of the canonical Lojban
dictionary would still be on the hook to define even the valsi
corresponding to those primes. I wouldn't expect the entry for {barda}
to be empty because of its semantic primitiveness. And we wouldn't
need non-Lojban words to define {barda}, just like the OED doesn't
resort to Chinese to define "big".


mu'o

-- 
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.