[lojban] Re: emotions

[Pierre Abbat <phma@webjockey.net>]

On Saturday 24 May 2003 11:22, Jordan DeLong wrote:
> Why?
>
> What is with this thought that gismu are somehow privledged brivla?
> This is the same thing that makes people assert that all cultures
> should have gismu, instead of some with gismu and some with lujvo.
>
> If you're talking about rafsi, go use zei.  If you're talking about
> word length, many lujvo have only 2 syllables, and 3 is totally
> fine (hell "parasite" is 3 in english).  What advantage could you
> possibly see for it being a gismu?

I repeat, I did not invent {parji}. Go ask whoever did. I did invent {zmase}, 
because "-ase" is a common suffix.

> I think this all rests on a fundamental misunderstanding of lojban
> word classes.  People like to think about gismu, cmavo and lujvo.
> But it's actually brivla, cmavo and cmene.  Gismu, lujvo and fu'ivla
> are just different types of brivla; none are more privledged than
> the others.

Not true. Some fu'ivla have rafsi (proposed); all gismu except {brod(i,o,u)} 
have rafsi; some gismu have short rafsi. So {malgaci zei smani} cannot be 
shortened, but {glauka zei cnebo} can be shortened to {glaukyne'o}, and 
{xamgu zei zmadu} can be shortened to {xagmau}.

phma
-- 
.i toljundi do .ibabo mi'afra tu'a do
.ibabo damba do .ibabo do jinga
.icu'u la ma'atman.