[lojban] Re: le fanmo sinxa pe la pier.

[Jorge "Llambías" <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar>]

la pier cusku di'e

> If there is more than one Mahatma, or there's an office of Mahatma distinct 
> from Mohandas who occupied it, and even if there isn't, we can say {lo me la 
> ma'atman}. That's a type-2 fu'ivla.

Dictionary.com offers:

ma·hat·ma    
n. 
1. In India and Tibet, one of a class of persons venerated for great 
knowledge and love of humanity. 
2. Mahatma [Hinduism.] Used as a title of respect for a person renowned 
for spirituality and high-mindedness. 

So Mohanda Gandhi was a mahatma, he was called the Mahatma.
Also, it seems that "mahatma" literally means "great soul", so
another possibility for Lojban could be {balru'i}.

Can {me la ma'atman} really refer to any mahatma, rather than to
the one(s) that I call Mahatma? Does {me} cancel the specificity
of {la}? The Book's discussion of type-1 and type-2 fu'ivla is not
very in-depth, but it does say after introducing them that "where 
a little more universality is desired, the word to be borrowed must 
be Lojbanized into one of several permitted forms." One could 
understand "more universality" to mean that a generic meaning, 
rather than reference to a specific person or object is desired.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com