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

Re: [lojban] cmevla as a class of brivla



  Okay, having finally caught up to this monster thread (but not yet the other one split from here), I shall proffer my observations/preferences.

1)  Let me state at the outset I am not in favor of the Merge.  I like the status quo,  except that I agree that COI la BRIVLA should be the preferred usage when referring to someone named BRIVLA, rather than an actual instance of the BRIVLA.

2) I think Bob, on the other hand, is way too draconian in his pronouncements.  la broda is fully a moniker as la brodan. is, and has the addition of having actual meaning attached.  I expect that he is too culturally American in this regard, and just thinks of all names as simply a string of phonemes,since we imported them from many many cultures.  It's unlikely that an American who names their kid even things like Daisy, Rose, or Pearl is really reflecting about the meanings of the names.  However that's not always true -- Gwyneth Paltrow's daughter Apple, for example.  My fourth son, Yehuda Chaim Mendel, has  a first name that we particularly chose for its meaning -- thankfulness, unlike his middle names, which while they have meanings, were chosen for other reasons.  And of course, many other cultures besides the Native Americans use meaningful names.  Besides Hebrew, Chinese comes to mind.  (btw, the only US President that was given the oath of office by his nickname was Jimmy Carter).  There is no reason to denigrate brivla names.

         --gejyspa



On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 8:20 AM, selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de> wrote:
la .lojbab. cu cusku di'e
Those exceptions are in fact significant - they are examples of the

brivla (or whatever word) being taken as a string of symbols/sounds that
exists on it own regardless of which word or kind of word that it is. It
would seem that you want names to be another example of a string of
symbols taken as such a standalone language unit.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying they are. I thought I had made that clear. A name is a word (or multiple words) used to refer to some entity, irrespective of what that word might mean.


But that isn't the case for Lojban.

You seem to be alone in thinking that (see other people's responses).

As you say, {zo tsani} is just the "standalone language unit" "tsani", the word itself, without any hidden places. But the accepted definition of {la} is:

la broda == lo selcme be zo broda

So you must have a different definition of {la} than everyone else.


I am saying that as far as Lojban is concerned "{la tsani} and {la tsani
be zo'e}" are linguistically equivalent, and there is no way to say "la
tsani" such that it DOESN'T include a possible value in the unspecified
places; they are there and they are "zo'e", if nothing else.

I understand your position. However, I doubt la tsani would agree that his name is "tsani be zo'e". It's not the same name as it is a different string of sounds.


And dotside or no dotside, I will never accept someone's choice of name
to be "la" %^)

That's your private business, but don't expect everyone else to follow your personal preference here. I also don't see how dotside is relevant to this.


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.