[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
le'avla/fu'ivla
- Subject: le'avla/fu'ivla
- From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@xxxxxx.xxxxx.xxxx
- Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 09:14:28 -0500 (EST)
>From: Robin Turner <robin@Bilkent.EDU.TR>
>
>Is there any way to make le'avla other than the algorithm given in
>the WWW Archive? I wouldn't feel comfortable advertising Lojban to
>my Turkish friends if the name of their language would come out as
>something like "bangrturku", a word they would have great difficulty
>in pronouncing in the first place!
Certainly. The metod given is one that "always works" more or less,
gives a word highly marked as a borrowing (which I at least think is good at
this stage), and doesn't require a lot of care or sophistication on the
part of the word coiner. In short it is good for nonce, or type 2 fu'ivla.
On the other hand, certain words like culture words for which we KNOW that we
want more or less permanent fu'ivla (they are not suitable for lujvo
and will see enough usage in the long term that they definitely belong
enshrined as "words") can be put in the rest of "fu'ivla space", which
broadly speaking includes anything that is not potentially a gismu, lujvo,
cmavo, cmene, and cannot break down into any of those in any possible speech
stream.
The trouble with such a negative definition is that there are no algorithmic
ways yet established for determining whether a word fits in that space. It
takes experience with the morphology and even then is still subject to error.
In the case of culture words like Turkish, we have specifically identified a
potential solution: rafsi fu'ivla, per section 16 of chapter 4 of the book
(p 80-81). The space reserved for such fu'ivla appears to definitely
always give a valid fu'ivla, so pretty much anyone can borrow a word into
that space. We suggest that only words that are useful in compounding
in the same way that gismu presumably are, be so borrowed. The experimental
part of the proposal, which is not an official part of the language, is the
"rafsi" part of the proposal. That is harder to test for impact on the
morphology algoirthm (though we are sure that it will work based on
inspection). Usage and continued testing will determine that part
stays in the language.
My suggestion then would be to borrow from Turkish in a form that would
not offend Turks, a word for their culture in the form described in that
book section, and then make an unofficial lujvo ....ybau, if that will
be more pleasing.
If you want to make a short (non-prefixed) type 4 fu'ivla for the turkish
language (and make sure it is distinct from turkic languages BTW), then you
have to play around to find out what will work. I cannot give you much
advice except to note that valid brivla forms having a consonant cluster
and ending with CVCV seem to usually work. But there is so sure answer.
lojbab
----
lojbab lojbab@access.digex.net
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: ftp.access.digex.net /pub/access/lojbab
or see Lojban WWW Server: href="http://xiron.pc.helsinki.fi/lojban/"
Order _The Complete Lojban Language_ - see our Web pages or ask me.