[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] RE:literalism
At 02:38 PM 10/20/2000 -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote:
lojbab:
<<A sky-scraper on the other hand does not in fact guska anything, and people
seem to feel that in particular the final term of the tanru used in lujvo
making out to apply literally. A metaphor at least as good would be
"penis-building" - at least we know it's a building of some kind.>>
Actually, skyscrapers scrape the sky -- they just don't leave marks (see also
airplanes). Okay, they literally scrape the wind, but that is less
appealing.
And is a wind-scraper something that scrapes the wind, or something that
uses the wind to scrape (i.e. wind erosion)
Sorry, but "penis building" doesn't work -- except in very
delusive male imaginations -- for things above say 30 stories.
I was referring to the general erectile phallic shape - you know,
non-literal metaphor and all that. I also once heard a feminist writing
that said that tall buildings were phallic so it came to mind when I was
try to think of a metaphoric way to describe just what kind of building a
very tall one is other than "very tall". Maybe I should have said
penis-shape-building, but that is moving towards literalism.
is as
important as literality. And what is special about the last place? Its a
good rule for fu'ivla, where we haven't a clue, but why here where we have?
I'm not sure, but it seems to be far more important to the literalists than
any others, possibly because the source metaphor would have its place
structure determined by the final term, so that if one tries to figure out
what a word means from context, you can understand the sentence more or
less even if you don't exactly know what the word means.
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