[lojban] Naming: Borrowed versus Native

[Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com>]

Reposted from a thread on the jbovlaste group:

My entire argument regarding Lojban names for things is as follows:

1) Borrowing words from other languages (fu'ivla) is a Bad Thing (http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/B/Bad-Thing.html) and should only be done when there is NO OTHER WAY. This means ANY language, including Latin.

2) Fluent jbopre are expected to be able to understand any gismu, cmavo, lujvo, etc. that they see without the need to consult a dictionary.

3) Specifically regarding creatures: Nearly every creature with a name has a *descriptive* common name, and all Linnean names of things are descriptive, in the Latin language.

4) As such, I see no reason why a descriptive cmene should not be preferable to a borrowed foreign cmene in *every* case.

I am hereby inviting discussion, critique, etc. regarding the above from anyone who wishes to.

-- 
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu

-- 
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.