From ragnarok@pobox.com Sun Oct 07 20:08:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: raganok@intrex.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 8 Oct 2001 03:05:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 35592 invoked from network); 8 Oct 2001 03:05:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by 10.1.1.221 with QMQP; 8 Oct 2001 03:05:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Oct 2001 03:08:29 -0000 Received: from Craig [209.42.200.98] by intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id A8B220730274; Sun, 07 Oct 2001 23:08:34 -0400 Reply-To: To: Subject: re: [lojban] patronymics Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 23:08:47 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-eGroups-From: "Craig" From: "Craig" >This would only make sense if someone named "McDonald" was called >"Son-of-Donald" in English. >The sound of the name is much more important than the meaning in the >vast majority of cases. For example, very few people named "McDonald" >would actually be the son of Donald (since that would imply, in our >modern world where surnames stay constant, that his father would be >named "Donald McDonald".) I was thinking in terms of languages where they do not, but it would indeed fail with English. An example would be my former exchange-student 'sister' - her last name was constant but she had a middle name of Abdullaenva because her father was named Abdulla; thus she would have as her patronymic in lojban would be serirabdUl. or serirabdulas. But if a McDonald can be named Ronald, why not Donald? --la kreig.daniyl. 'segu le balvi temci gi mi'o renvi lo purci .i ga le fonxa janbe gi du mi' -la djimis.BYFet xy.sy. gubmau ckiku nacycme: 0x5C3A1E74