[lojban] Re: age

[gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>]

On Wednesday, June 27, 2012 3:10:18 PM UTC+4, remod wrote:
> I was trying to say "the 'I Ching' is a book more than 5000 years old".
>
> The first problem I encountered is {cukta}. When we say {cukta} are we
> thinking about a physical instance of a book (with its pages,
> hardcover etc) or the concept is general enough to include the
> abstract concept of "books"?

I'm for perceiving cukta as an abstract concept. The definition doesn't mention "paper" or any other medium.

Not for papri, unfortunately.

Wikipedia pages are called ckupau which is fine for me.

> Then I started thinking about "age". We have a "by standard" place for
> "young" and "old" which I think it's not to be used to express the
> age. Then we have an experimental gismu {laldo} whose gloss suggests
> it's just a word for "old" to avoid considering "old" as just the
> opposite of "young".
>
> That said I'm still uncertain on how to express something/someone age ...
>
> Suggestions?
>
> remod

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/pX7b0dxa0roJ.
 
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.