Subject: Re: [lojban] Retraction, Part 1

From: "Adam Raizen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 02:39:37 +0200

la xorxes cusku di'e

> la pier cusku di'e
>
> >jipci tarmi isn't right either; it's the shape of a chicken, not
something
> >shaped like a chicken, which is jipci seltai or jipci tamsmi.
>
> That's right if you stick to the place structures as presented in
> the gismu list. I find that {tarmi} and {skari} are much more useful
> if taken to mean "x1 is of the shape of x2" and "x1 is of the color
> of x2". Otherwise I don't know what to put in the x1 of the gismu.
> In the rare cases when you want to talk of the abstract shape or
> color, they're {ka ce'u tarmi makau} and {ka ce'u skari makau},
> or {kamtai} and {kamska} for short.

The canonical definition of 'skari' is "x1 is/appears to be of
color/hue x2", which appears the same as your definition if you can
put an object in x2 and get its color applied to x1, and that seems
most likely to me. Your definition of 'tarmi' seems to be 'seltai' if
it is possible to put an object in tarmi1 and get its shape applied to
tarmi2, which seems plausible and is how I use it.

It remains to be seen whether usage can flip the places of tarmi.

mu'o mi'e adam