At 10:26 PM 10/8/02 +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote:
la robin.tr cusku di'e
>The two Lojbanisms that really caught on amongst the players
>were "mabla" (correct usage) and "le do mamta cu gerku" (incorrect, in
>canonical Lojban).
What do you call "correct usage" for {mabla}?
I assume it was used as a swear word, which I agree should
be correct usage.
But the official definition says it is used to describe a swear
word, not that it is one. ({zoi gy shit gy mabla}, but not {mabla}
for "shit!") So it would not constitute correct usage for
fundamentalists.
I disagree. "mabla" alone is an observative of something derogatively interpreted
1. Many situations that are "mabla broda" are also "broda mabla", in which case "mabla" alone applies. 2. If "zoi gy shit gy mabla" then "lu'e (la'e zoi gy shit gy) mabla". Metonymy is completely legit in observatives because of la'e/lu'e. So is sumti-raising because of tu'a.
lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org