new brivla (was: Re: [lojban] Set of answers encore

[And Rosta <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>]

Pierre:
#On Saturday 29 September 2001 22:32, And Rosta wrote:
#> IOW, what I am trying to say is that the intensional/extensional
#> distinction carries over to all cognitive/perceptual predicates.
#>
#> I believe that the mainstream view among lojbanists is that everything
#> receives the extensional reading, except for LE du'u sumti, which are
#> intensional.
#
#I have no idea what this means, let alone what my view is, and have no idea 
#how you expect the language to succeed if you spend all your time quibbling 
#about cmavo and not adding new brivla to the language. To clarify these 
#questions, we need usage, and to get usage, we need vocabulary.

Let's say then that that's the mainstream view among those who have a
view.

Myself I don't feel the need to create new brivla to be so pressing, compared
to sorting out more fundamental (and more interesting...) issues. But it would
certainly be a great help to have a vlaste that included lujvo, and not just
lujvo used more than 100 times (-- a threshold mentioned by Lojbab). It
should probably be a vetted list, to filter out dud lujvo, but otherwise as
large as possible. This might speed up composition; for example, the text
you sent me included a very good lujvo for 'saddle', which I would like
to use should I ever have cause to write in Lojban about saddles, but I
completely forget what the lujvo was, so would instead have to try to
reinvent one that would probably be inferior. Far better if I could just
search for 'saddle' in a very big vlaste, and find there your lujvo.

--And.