Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: word for "www" (was: Archive location.)

From: "And Rosta" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 02:20:09 +0100

Robin Lee Powell
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 11:00:03PM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> > Robin CA:
> > > 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.
> > 
> > Not so. Lujvo are simply a means of creating new words for new
> > meanings. However, other things being equal (e.g. word length),
> > a candidate lujvo is held to be the more superior the more its
> > meaning and place structure can be guessed from its constituent
> > parts.
> 
> I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or not. 8)

Not. It is not the case that the whole point of lujvo is that someone
should be able to dissect them and figure out what you mean. The
whole point of lujvo is that they are words formed from parts that
have independent meaning within Lojban, but with a meaning that is
not equivalent to the sum of their parts. Their dissectablity is not
their point.

--And.