Subject: [lojban] Re: Let's be friends

From: Martin Norbäck <[email-masked]>
Date: 19 Nov 2002 13:58:24 +0100

tis 2002-11-19 klockan 13.30 skrev Pierre Abbat:
> On Tuesday 19 November 2002 07:09, robin wrote:
> li'o
> > I rather like the practice of using the combining form for the first
> > element and the full gismu for the second, so that people who have a
> > grasp of the gismu list but can't be bothered to learn the combining
> > forms can at least get an idea of what the word is about. For example,
> > many years back I coined "kurmikce" for "nurse". I could have used
> > "kurmi'e", but apart from the fact that I like the sound of "kurmikce",
> > it's easier to guess.
> 
> Sometimes the gismu is misleading. For instance, latfi'e and mlafi'e are 
> fish, but xajyfi'e isn't, so you probably don't want to say "xajyfinpe".

But isn't it an absolute requirement that the tanru and the lujvo are
special cases of the root gismu?

If xajyfi'e (dolphin?) isn't a fish, then finpe cannot mean "fish", but
perhaps "fish-like animal".

And the gismu word-list says: 
x1 is a fish of species x2 [metaphorical extension to sharks, non-fish
aquatic vertebrates]

Why sharks are mentioned, I don't know, since they are true fish, but
dolphins can be counted as non-fish aquatic vertebrates, as can penguins
and crocodiles.

So I don't buy the argument not to use the full gismu in a lujvo, the
rafsi would mean the exact same thing.

mi'e norpan