[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban] Re: Regarding the gismu {vlagi}.
- To: lojban-list@lojban.org
- Subject: [lojban] Re: Regarding the gismu {vlagi}.
- From: Lindar Greenwood <lindarthebard@yahoo.com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 14:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1245620413; bh=/Gio0prSVAZavk9UO/cNWJqWBLWCJgGsBkv/BPaL/Pc=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=OHV/xmyUBsQ3lzmib0WWMMca5xSrFY6n60NALqj15g2LxBPjzoelFpLD94aLsEPnH6dWmlGwDTZyTY+HqGtIauWpcV7B2johRY3qLGyW+okNPtubdbhlV5USq9Dt8y2uGO5erJVc1L+wIOCas+Ausj8px0C60XrnVoga2Jt6B9U=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=L19qmv/+1sk2E2aJT11Zxi7Yb7Hey2FvWXKE0Drn/LEjv+zSjWEMpdkY/EmIU2cqvzdqSvsaa35XyG6Ieygg40dELPGauCSmlaA3SJq0r3EfotPYCuls/aKn5owDtVFRIZ226StHG1jziA6TDkTQYvfBPJ3p1qZXnCQPbci3R8M=;
- In-reply-to: <20090621202955.GC23324@nvg.org>
- References: <479039.23077.qm@web50403.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <20090621202955.GC23324@nvg.org>
- Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
- Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Couldn't this word be freed up to be used for another word?
I mean, if we're making specialised words for things, why don't we have a word specifically for "switch" {vrabatke/vraga batke} or "door" {vrogai} instead of calling them lever-buttons and passageway-covers? We should at least have some level of consistancy with things. If it's called a man-clit and a fem-dick, then there should be one word for the whole package, and not two words for the same thing. In fact, it's been consistantly told to me that words are intentionally not created because they aren't common enough to warrant their own words, or because they can be just as easily described as a lujvo. Even then, I've had a large argument over my preference for the word {vrabatke} because most feel that {batke} covers all manner of actuators, switches, buttons, dials, etc. and there's no need to differentiate between them.
So, tl;dr could you explain your reasoning a bit better?
----- Original Message ----
From: Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org>
To: Lindar Greenwood <lindarthebard@yahoo.com>
Cc: lojban-list@lojban.org
Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2009 1:29:55 PM
Subject: [lojban] Re: Regarding the gismu {vlagi}.
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 05:52:40PM -0700, Lindar Greenwood wrote:
>
> So, isn't {vlagi} just taking up space when we could just as easily use {fetplibu} and use {vlagi} for something else?
> The use seems extremely redundant, and I would love to know the opinions of the Lojban community (and officials) on this matter.
It is indeed redundant. But since the purpose of the set of gismu is not to remove redundancy, this is not considered a problem.
See http://www.lojban.org/files/why-lojban/reply.txt for a discussion of this. (Search for 'seem to have been chosen at random').
--
Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/
Inuktitut iis eesseentiiaallyy Fiinniish aas spooqqeen iin Greenlaand.
--Clint Jackson Baker, via Essentialist Explanations
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.