[lojban] Re: Named multiples

[Lindar <lindarthebard@yahoo.com>]

Well, I shall start using this system (very carefully) on IRC.
My ideas:

1. COI implies {la} ({.i coi xalbo} is {.i coi la xalbo} and never {.i
coi le xalbo}.
2. {la} is merged with LE and is terminated by {ku}.
3. lo --------- le -------- la
My idea of how {la} works now is based on a scale where {lo} is the
other end and {le} is the midpoint. {lo broda} must broda, {le broda}
doesn't necessarily have to broda, but that's what I'm calling it, and
{la broda} doesn't have to broda, but that's the proper name for it.
To address the "la erases all meaning" vs. "la keeps the meaning"
thing, my interpretation is that the meaning of the x1 is the name,
just like how it works for lo/le. Context can decide how names are
translated ("Hi, Day!" vs. "Hi, Donri!" vs. "Hi, Dag!"), but the
default is always the meaning (Hi, Day!).
4. Use of cmevla as brivla should be restricted to brands of things
({la .opel.} is the brand, {lo .opel.} is a car of that brand.) or
similar situations in which names of things are based upon names, "x1
is called/named..." definitions, simple and recognisable slang which
is appropriate for the conversation (perhaps {.i mi .lol.} or
something silly for "I lol'd." or {.i mi .dogezas.} for "I (am)
bow(ing)."), or quick borrow-words which should be corrected by others
({.i mi .going.} would be understood quickly by English speakers and
could be corrected to {cliva} or {klama}.).

My strong opinion is that this is very fun and perhaps useful, but
should not be a substitute for good fu'ivla.

Thoughts?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.