From xod@thestonecutters.net Tue Sep 10 11:41:54 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_0_1); 10 Sep 2002 18:41:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 56021 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2002 18:41:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Sep 2002 18:41:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Sep 2002 18:41:54 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17opxS-0006hZ-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:41:54 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17opws-0006hE-00; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:41:19 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:41:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.111.194.10] (helo=granite.thestonecutters.net) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17opwm-0006h1-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:41:12 -0700 Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8AIfBD69750 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 14:41:11 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 14:41:11 -0400 (EDT) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: Re: word for "www" (was: Archive location.) In-Reply-To: <20020910182959.GF6798@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Message-ID: <20020910143317.G68275-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 1028 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Invent Yourself Reply-To: xod@thestonecutters.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 01:21:13PM -0400, Invent Yourself wrote: > > >From http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?ralcku > > > > > > 1. maldzena reservations about the virtuality of a cukta can be > > overcome by considering the modern meaning of the term "document", and > > considering a cukta as a collection of documents. > > > > 2. The gismu definition does not refer to the cohesiveness often > > considered necessary for "books". > > > > 3. Is a "single website" a cukta? Can a cukta be in hypertext form and > > retain its status as a single cukta? Is a Wiki any sort of cukta? Beware > > of importing the malglico semantics of "book"! > > Since you decided that my other response was too flamy, here's the part > I actually wanted a response to: > > > > The whole *point* of lujvo, unless I'm missing something, is that > someone should be able to dissect them and figure out what you mean. > > I will bet you *any* *amount* *of* *money* (and I mean that) that if you > ask 20 random non-lojbanists that you haven't discussed any of this > stuff with what 'principal (as in most important) book' means, with no > other information, that no more than 1 or 2 will guess the web. > > Seriously. Any amount of money you like. I just got a check for a > stock disbursment. I'll give you 10 to 1 odds. > > You can even show them the full definition of ralju and cukta, but you > can't give them any other information. > > This seems like a reasonable sanity test for a lujvo, don't you think? pc wrote that: "The long tradition has been for creative non-literal lujvo -- despite the possibilities of cultural bias that that contains. This case does not seem to be terribly creative...." This was discussing balcukta, not ralcku. I daresay the same ideas hold across the pair. According to you, this lujvo is far beyond the bounds of reason, but according to "tradition", it hardly is. However, I think the question of what a cukta is and is not, and whether a webpage/website/whole web qualifies as one, is more interesting and more specifically germane than the general issue of acceptable lujvo, which in any case is overridden by usage, making the general trends irrelevant for any specific case. -- Before Sept. 11 there was not the present excited talk about a strike on Iraq. There is no evidence of any connection between Iraq and that act of terrorism. Why would that event change the situation? -- Howard Zinn