Re: [lojban] la za'e filjvocedra (The Age of Easy Lujvo)

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> I must have gotten mixed up from reading the CLL's algorithm for turning a
> tanru into a lujvo.  For those of us not well-versed enough, what are the
> main arguments for/against tcebroda vs brodytce?  If a lujvo is defined and
> not necessarily built with a rigid rule-set from it's component gismu, then
> tcebroda vs brodytce is ultimately a question of preference right?

We're discussing preferences, yes. My preference is for being as
systematic as possible, so:

zmadu fi lo ka broda -> rodmau
mleca fi lo ka broda -> rodme'a
traji lo ka broda -> rodrai
mutce lo ka broda -> rodytce
milxe lo ka broda -> rodmli
cenba lo ka broda -> rodycne
zenba lo ka broda -> rodze'a
jdika lo ka broda -> rodjdika

and probably some more I'm forgetting.

I'll leave the argument for "tcebroda" to those who prefer it. I don't
find too convincing any appeals to English wording sounding better one
way or the other, or to tanru..

If you prefer "tcebroda" then presumably you should also prefer
"zmabroda" and "rairbroda", or if not why not?

A similar discrepancy I have with those who prefer prefix sim- to
suffix -si'u for reciprocals.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.