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

["Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On 8/10/07, Nathaniel Krause <nathanielkrause@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 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?

Not really, there is no strict connection between {brode broda}
and {ro'erbroda}. In particular the place structure of {brode broda}
is identical to the place structure of {broda}, whereas the place
structure of {ro'erbroda} is independent and usually different from that
of {broda}. There are many informal relationships, for example you
can more or less be certain of what the place structure of {ro'ergau}
is just based on the place structures of brode and gasnu, but there
are no fixed and absolute rules.

Having said that, the expected and normal outcome is that a
ro'erbroda will indeed be a kind of broda, but it doesn't always
work.

mu'o mi'e xorxes