[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant

To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant
From: Nathaniel Krause <nathanielkrause@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 21:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=Vg4nO7a/92J//A/O4U9UuD6o2CpuT+2Z/NA8lB4hlwQ/+eybwqyx3S8mPT+zh4HuBDbCNetUsf1K7qI7sWFRgoFcqmHBwtJQZMuOaxbV9qptmxdP1cLAvfbMVWR6xFx4V3zIEE7zxfHm5l4iv7Jb8bL4gy5Bs2nDuW8dl4MLpkA=;
In-reply-to: <46BBDB4D.6020401@lojban.org>
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org

Can someone clarify Lojban's semantic philosophy in this regard? I was under the impression that for something to be a ro'erbroda it must by definition be an instance of a brode broda and, more broadly, an instance of a broda. Is the statement {lo'e ro'erbroda na broda} logically contradictory?

mu'o mi'e .sen.

Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:

It doesn't have to be a gerku or a labno, to be expressible with a lujvo
of either.

What is wrong with "friko-kalte-gerku"?

Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.

Follow-Ups:
- [lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant
  - From: Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>
- [lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant
  - From: "Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>

References:
- [lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant
  - From: Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>

Prev by Date: [lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant
Next by Date: [lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant
Previous by thread: [lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant
Next by thread: [lojban-beginners] Re: anti-Zipfian gismu rant
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread