On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Wuzzy
<almikes@aol.com> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:38:52 -0600
Jonathan Jones <
eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> {la'oi.BAI.} is much shorter than {lo camvrbai}
I disagree with you taking two paragraphs worth of issue on a single word.
“la'oi.BAI.” is 3 syllables and 10 characters long.
“locmavrbai” is 4 syllables and also 10 characters long. (I removed the
space because you didn’t use spaces in “la'oi.BAI.” either. It’s
grammatical.)
.i lo mi ciska tadji na vasru lonu vimcu lo calyle'u lo jbini be lo gadri ce bridi
A difference of one syllable is not “much” for me.
I intentionally picked type-3 fu'ivla because that was the safest
choice. I don’t want to waste precious type-4 fu'ivla space with 120
fu'ivla and I doubt that selma'o are concepts used that often that
every single syllable matters so it is an acceptable price for me to
pay.
You seem to have a different opinion on that. So be it, I am okay with
that.
I never commented on the type of word. While it is true that I dislike type-3 fu'ivla for aesthetic reasons, that's an opinion and irrelevant to the discussion. I'm merely stating what I believe to be reasons the community would have.
> possibly easier to remember
That may be indeed true. But it is only slightly easier, I think. I
tried hard to keep the changes at minimum.
> it's unlikely your suggestion will be adopted.
I doubt that. At least I would certainly adopt it, therefore you are
wrong here.
By the community. It's your idea. You don't count. I'm surprised you needed that clause to be explicitly stated.
Also, “la'oi” is an experimental cmavo.
, which is about as useful with single word names as {zo'oi.} is for its purpose, and is widely used in the community.
Unlike many "experimental" valsi, like {.o'ai}, which are pure synonyms of existing words
I avoid experimental cmavo,
especially if they are replacable. And in this case it is replacable.
The selma'o fu'ivla are in no way experimental, they are just new
valsi and really don't change anything. Really nothing spectacular. So
“la'oi” can't replace the selma'o fu'ivla. And I’d be very glad to see
the selma'o fu'ivla on jvovlaste one day so people can start to learn
and possibly use them. Just the 5 “irregular” words need to be
re-checked and I want to hear more community input on that issue.
and then the selma'o fu'ivla should be pretty ready for submission. As
soon as the selma'o fu'ivla are on jbovlaste, they will be adopted and
I am pretty sure. The reason for that is tha probably every newbie will
probably have searched the dictionary for the translation of a selma'o
like “BAI”. With selma'o fu'ivla these people will find what they were
looking for and they would of course adopt it because why not?
I don't know why you've typed so much on the non-existent issue of {la'oi.} "replacing" your idea, because what your goal is is for your idea to replace the one already in existence- {la'oi.} That would have been a sensible argument if you were talking about {la'oi.} and {la'o}, but your idea can't be replaced when it's not even in use.
Which does not imply that other possibilities to express selma'o names
in Lojban are invalidated. The selma'o fu'ivla can peacefully co-exist
with all the other ways to refer to a selma'o. Nobody is forced to
choose one way and to stick with it forever. It is nice to be able to
express the same concept in different ways.
I am, however, also pretty sure that you wouldn’t adopt selma'o
fu'ivla. ;-)