From eks2@york.ac.uk Tue Oct 30 07:40:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eks2@york.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 30 Oct 2001 15:40:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 1143 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 15:40:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Oct 2001 15:40:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n33.groups.yahoo.com) (10.1.2.114) by mta1 with SMTP; 30 Oct 2001 15:40:09 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eks2@york.ac.uk Received: from [10.1.2.11] by n33.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 30 Oct 2001 15:40:09 -0000 Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:40:08 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Moss and lichen Message-ID: <9rmhkp+m7b7@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <0110292141520I.01133@neofelis> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1484 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 144.32.128.133 From: "Evgueni Sklyanin" X-Yahoo-Profile: sklyanin --- In lojban@y..., Pierre Abbat wrote: > On Monday 29 October 2001 21:25, Craig wrote: > > But if it is moss, what do we call lichen? And if it is lichen, what do we > call moss? Besides, lichens are classified taxonomically; they are mostly > ascomycetes, IIRR. They are classified by the fungus component. > > phma A while ago I have already asked this question when working on a Russian translation of the gismu list. The reply of lojbab (see it at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/1261 ) was the following: >The denotation is closer to that of mosses, and the concept was >the mass of non-flowering greenery plants; you might also include >ferns in this definition, but I think we were less sure that would >hold. At least in older classifications (not sure of the current >biology), while a lichen was a symbiote, it was a symbiote that was >considered to be in the plant kingdom rather than the animal kingdom. > >Now we have 7 or 8 kingdoms worth of biological taxonomy, and I don't >know that lichens are still considered plants. I know that algae >are sometimes plants and sometimes in a separate kingdom, and that >bacteria have a couple kingdoms all to themselves and are no longer >considered animals. But Lojban gismu making was based on Loglan >gismu making which dates back to 1950, when biological taxonomy >seemed as fixed as the stars (which of course aren't fixed, so we >should have known better zo'o). mi'e .evgenis.