[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: literalism [was: Re: [lojban] Re: looking at arjlujv.txt
At 05:08 PM 10/19/2000 -0400, Invent Yourself wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, [iso-8859-1] Alfred W. Tueting (Tüting) wrote:
> I'm all other than sure about this well-sounding statement: there are
> real horrible-looking (-sounding) lujvo monsters, maybe
> only appropriate for silly machines (sometimes worse than Assembler
> encoded text).
> I'm pleading for short-/conciseness rather than pedantic
> descriptiveness. (That doesn't mean that I do not agree with xorxes.
> to
> "respect" the places, or with maikl. to avoid fancy metaphors). Lujvo
> should be "convincing" from their meaning and concise to
> keep them in memory (they should become "lokshe").
Lujvo are not as commonly needed as is commonly thought. There should be a
lujvo for toothbrush, but do we need one for rapist?
If we want to talk about someone who commits the crime of rape, we need a
word for the crime and the perpetrator. Certainly a tanru will get
bothersome if repeated multiple times in the discussion.
"Rapist", recalling
the long discussions held recently, fought by about 5 equally valid and
conflicting positions, is a word that cries out for a specific tanru when
it is introduced into a discussion.
So probably we need (at least) 5 lujvo for rapist, each with its own valid
place structure and emphasizing some aspect that the speaker is trying to
access. There probably is no short lujvo that will capture all uses of the
English word "rape".
Probably "force-sex-crime" will work in most but leave loopholes - places
we would use English "rape" that don't fit, and maybe a few situations
where the word would fit that are not expressed with English "rape".
Rather than isolate the canonical
definition among the several closely-related yet different choices offered
during the debate, a tanru would specify the exact spin desired.
So would a lujvo made from that tanru. Those among us who would make
lujvo, would do so as abbreviations for a tanru that we might need to use
often enough even in one piece of writing to make writing (and reading) the
tanru cumbersome. Indeed, I think that the best way to introduce a coined
lujvo is to use the defining metaphor the first time and then
parenthetically add the lujvo form which would be used in later places
instead of the tanru.
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