The phrase, "traffic light" could mean lights that illuminate the road and traffic (i.e. "street lights"), or all of the light pollution from street lights and lights on cars.
This phrase communicates the concept not because it describes the concept so well, but because the phrase "traffic light" is specifically associated with that thing.
I think an association between a specific phrase and a specific thing comes with more usage, however in many cases lojban can be more precisely descriptive instead.
lo ma'efle jitro sinxa
imo this is a better semantic description of a traffic light than "traffic light" is.
This lojban phrase is missing is a strong association between this specific phrase and the specific thing. Is that association still required with a more detailed description?
On Monday, November 10, 2014 7:46:20 AM UTC+10, TR NS wrote:
On Sunday, November 9, 2014 12:54:55 PM UTC-5, stevo wrote:
Or at least a specific phrase that means 'traffic light', just as English uses not a single word, but a phrase.
Maybe that's the kind of construct Lojban needs --a way to use two (or more) words together that have a specific (gestalt?) meaning rather then a metaphorical one. Yet I don't see how the grammar would allow it.