Old and new

[Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>]

la lojbab cusku di'e

> Excluding PEOPLE, when we say "How old is this thing?" we often mean "How
> long have you had it?", which IS more-or-less agreeing with slabu.

"How old is this house?" doesn't mean "How long have you had it?". Even
something more personal, like "How old are these clothes?" doesn't mean
that. It usually means "How long has it/have they been in existance?".

Can we say in Lojban that a house is citno, ("short in elapsed duration"),
or does {citno} only mean "young", i.e. only applies to animate beings?

There seem to be three concepts:

1- Age of animate beings
        English: young - old
        Lojban:  citno - tolci'o

2- Age of objects
        English: new - old
        Lojban:  ?citno - ?tolci'o

3- Novelty
        English: new - old
        Lojban:  cnino - slabu

For example, when someone says that they put new tires to their car,
they usually are talking about the "age" of the tires, not their novelty.

When someone says "I just discovered a very interesting old book", they
mean old in age, since obviously it's a novelty for them.

> The only
> question is when we talk about age is some absolute sense, which can be
> expressed as jmive temci and in a lot of other ways.  But my original
> reconciliation fo the two meanings of "old" was to interpret age in years
> as "long familiarity with the world/life", which could therefor be
 jmive-slabu.

That's familiarity _to_ the world/life, rather than with it. "Long familiarity
with the world/life" would have to be {se slabu}.

I think it's a rationalization to allow slabu to have both meanings.

> Note that I also have "nilnalci'o" defined as a lujvo for age, and both will
> show up in the E-list in the dictionary (pronbably with some clarifying
> remarks in this case).

What's the argument against {nilci'o}?

Similarly, does "length" have to be {nilclani}, or can it also be {niltordu}?

> Note also that I have started using nalci'o instead of tolci'o for the
> 'other' gloss of "old".  "tolci'o", as a polar opposite, should not mean
> merely "old", but the extreme: "ancient".

Well, I don't think "old" means "other-than-young". {tcetolci'o} can be used
for "ancient". But in this case, it is a problem of how you interpret the
English words, the Lojban ones are clear.

> Probably the slabu based words for age will tend to fade out since others
> are getting established and used.

If the dictionary says that "slabu" can be used as old in age, that's how
it is going to be used, I don't see why that use would fade, since it is
probably the most common one.

> But they HAVE seen use in Lojban text,
> and I am hesitant to remove them since I am unconvinced that they are
> wrong, as opposed to merely 'not the best'.

I'm not saying they are wrong, but you are allowing slabu to mean tolcitno,
and at the same time saying it doesn't mean that.

Jorge