[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] What's the deal with me'ispe and bunspe?



On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 1:56 PM, vruxir <kextrii@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, March 5, 2012 3:09:52 PM UTC-5, aionys wrote:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, vruxir wrote:
...I would assume, by my understanding of tanru where the first element modifies the second, that the most basic definitions of me'ispe and bunspe are:

lujvo are not tanru. lujvo are defined words, said definition determined by the creator, and do not necessarily have anything to do with the meaning of any tanru.
 
That's correct. However, a lujvo is a compact way to express a useful relationship, and there's only room for one (or very few) lujvo combining a particular set of terms. So it makes sense that if the lujvo is created suboptimally without forethought, it can be changed by consensus, as you proposed. Except we disagree on what modification should be made.
 
lo me'ispe: sister kind-of spouse -> sister's spouse (gender not specified, so not necessarily brother- or sister-in-law)
(shorthand for lo speni be lo mensi)

a "sister kind-of spouse" is a spouse who is a sister, not a sister of a spouse.

I concede that, as a basic definition of "sister kind-of spouse", incestuous marriage is just as conceivable as spouse-associated-with-a-sister. Which meaning would be more frequently referred to in typical conversation, I wonder.
 
By my definition, {zo me'ispe smuni lu ko'a mensi ko'e lonu speni lu} = "x1 is the sister of x2 by the bond of marriage; x1 is x2's sister-in-law"


But it still looks to me like a lujvo relatable to a reversed tanru, where the second element, "speni", is modifying the first element, "mensi"; i.e. mensi co speni "sister of-type spouse"

Like you said, the lujvo doesn't have to resemble any particular tanru, but it would be easier to understand and remember if the ordering didn't seem backwards.


mu'o

I wouldn't consider {speni mensi} or {mensi speni} to be a sister-in-law, but I would consider them equivalent. In a tanru. the x1 (but not necessarily the other places) has to fit the x1 of both the seltau and the tertau. In this case, that means that both {lo speni mensi} and {lo mensi speni} must be both {lo mensi} and {lo speni}, i.e. a married sister, a sister who is also a wife.

By the current definition, {lo me'ispe cu speni lo mensi be lo se speni}: "x1 is married to the sister of x2", {lo bunspe cu speni lo bruna be lo se speni}, "x1 is married to the brother of x2".

As you can see, the current definition isn't based on a tanru either.

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
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.