Re: [lojban] curnu

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

On Friday, December 28, 2012 7:56:49 PM UTC+4, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Friday, December 28, 2012 05:08:41 la gleki wrote:
> > Any worm-like creatures, I believe.
> > I remember that children can sometimes name worms "snakes". The issue is
> > somewhat related.
> > And this is not the problem of Lojban.
> > Can we call snakes reptiles? They used to be called reptiles.
> > Some new school textbooks have already started to deny that, however.
>
> The problem with "reptile" is that the traditional circumscription is 
> paraphyletic. If you call snakes and crocodiles, but not birds, reptiles, you 
> run afoul of the dinosaurs. Birds are a branch of coelurosaurs, which are 
> dinosaurs, and dinosaurs and crocodiles are both archosaurs, whereas snakes 
> are not. But as long as "respa" has a consistent definition, there is no 
> Lojbanic problem, even if it is paraphyletic.
>
> The problem with "curnu" is that it has an ambiguous definition or two 
> competing definitions. It's okay to have a fuzzy definition (there's no clear 
> boundary between "blanu" and "crino"), but it's not OK for a brivla to have 
> two different meanings, "worm" and "invertebrate".

I see.

{vertebrata} is a modern term. It should be a zi'evla.

Worm must be refered to worm-like creatures only.

So I suggest changing the definition. No invertebrates there, please.

 

>  Lobsters are invertebrates 
> but not worms; slowworms are worms but not invertebrates.
>
> Pierre
> -- 
> gau do li'i co'e kei do

-- 
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/-/frkxwSRKMFEJ.
 
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.