[lojban] Re: 'Solve & coagula' in lojban?

[Kosmaton <Kosmaton@gmx.com>]

In fact, if I read the definitions of {fendi} and {jorne} carefully,
{fedjo'e} would not be ambiguous, it would be 'splitting, and being
joined' (active for splitting, passive for being joined). And that is
why .arpis suggested {selfedjo'e} rather than something like
{fedseljo'e}?

How much compounding can you do? {fedselfedla'ajo'e} for 'splitting,
being split, connecting, and being connected?


On 8 jul, 09:55, Kosmaton <Kosma...@gmx.com> wrote:
> Thanks a lot Jacob and .arpis for explaining these aspects! I am now
> tending to just paint {selfedjo'e} on the boat (would you include the
> curly braces?), and refer to her as {la selfedjo'e}. It is more
> compact than the longer imperative phrase, and if I get it right the
> meaning is 'being split and joined', which is good.
>
> Of perhaps just {fedjo'e}. That's even shorter and avoids confusion
> with 'self' in English. And I'm happy to leave it open whether things
> are being split and joined, or doing the splitting and joining - maybe
> both at once. Or is such ambiguity frowned upon in the lojban ethos?
>
> I think {fendi} captures the meaning better than {runta}, but just out
> of interest, how would you form the compound word with {runta}? I
> gather that for {fedjo'e} you stuck the two relevant rafsi together
> (just from scanning what jbovlaste says), but no rafsi is listed for
> {runta}.
>
> Thanks again!

-- 
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.