From pycyn@aol.com Sun Feb 17 06:33:43 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_2); 17 Feb 2002 14:33:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 34325 invoked from network); 17 Feb 2002 14:33:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 17 Feb 2002 14:33:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m03.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.6) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 17 Feb 2002 14:33:43 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.3c.197441a0 (4470) for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 09:33:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3c.197441a0.29a11941@aol.com> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 09:33:37 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Green chili and ginseng To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_3c.197441a0.29a11941_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_3c.197441a0.29a11941_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 2/16/2002 9:33:58 PM Central Standard Time,=20 phma@webjockey.net writes: > I thought that green peppers are Capsicum frutescens, while green chilis = are=20 >=20 > C. annuum, as are the jalape=F1os and habaneros (which I called {xabnero= =20 > kapsiku} in the recipe). Does it make sense to call bell peppers {kapsiku= =20 > be=20 > la janbe}? >=20 Some chilis belong to C. frutescens and some rather mild forms to C. annum = --=20 indeed there are arguments about where to put most peppers since the damned= =20 things interfertilize like crazy. But the Bell strain was named for Dr. Bel= l,=20 not for bells (as in shape?). <> library which gave the name in some Native American language, and it mean= s > about the same thing.> > > Ditto, mutatis mutandis. The nut-and-berry merchants like to distinguish > Korean, Siberian and New York (etc.) ginseng and there may be minor > specific variations. I don't know what you mean by "ditto", since I'm asking a different kind of= =20 question. American ginseng is Panax quinquefolium, Korean is P. ginseng, an= d=20 Siberian is Eleutherococcus senticoccus. But I'm asking whether {remgenja} = is=20 an appropriate word for them, not how to call the different species.> Sorry I misread the question. If you are doing taxonomical stuff, then the= =20 {remgenja} would be inappropriate, but I gather you are doing the more=20 Lojbanic thing of dealing with common plants and the like. In that case,=20 since they are treated as essentially the same and their chief ingredients= =20 are the same, I use one general word for them all (but would resist throwin= g=20 in the vrious mandrakes). --part1_3c.197441a0.29a11941_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 2/16/2002 9:33:5= 8 PM Central Standard Time, phma@webjockey.net writes:

I thought that green peppers = are Capsicum frutescens, while green chilis are
C. annuum, as are the jalape=F1os and habaneros (which I called {xabnero kapsiku} in the recipe). Does it make sense to call bell peppers {kapsiku b= e
la janbe}?

Some chilis belong to C. frutescens and some rather mild forms to C. annum = -- indeed there are arguments about where to put most peppers since the dam= ned things interfertilize like crazy. But the Bell strain was named for Dr.= Bell, not for bells (as in shape?).

<> <Is it OK to call ginseng {remgenja}? I just saw a book about i= t at the
> library which gave the name in some Native American language, and it m= eans
> about the same thing.>
>
> Ditto, mutatis mutandis. The nut-and-berry merchants like to dis= tinguish
> Korean, Siberian and New York (etc.) ginseng and there may be minor > specific variations.

I don't know what you mean by "ditto", since I'm asking a different kind of=
question. American ginseng is Panax quinquefolium, Korean is P. ginseng, an= d
Siberian is Eleutherococcus senticoccus. But I'm asking whether {remgenja} = is
an appropriate word for them, not how to call the different species.>
Sorry I misread the question. If you are doing taxonomical stuff, the= n the {remgenja} would be inappropriate, but I gather you are doing the mor= e Lojbanic thing of dealing with common plants and the like. In that = case, since they are treated as essentially the same and their chief ingred= ients are the same, I use one general word for them all (but would resist t= hrowing in the vrious mandrakes).

--part1_3c.197441a0.29a11941_boundary--