From lojban-out@lojban.org Tue Nov 19 05:27:15 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 19 Nov 2002 13:27:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 74257 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2002 13:27:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Nov 2002 13:27:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Nov 2002 13:27:14 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18E8PK-0006hp-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 05:27:14 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18E8PE-0006hY-00; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 05:27:08 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 19 Nov 2002 05:27:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from gw.safelogic.se ([62.119.45.210] helo=mail.safelogic.se) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18E8P9-0006hP-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 05:27:03 -0800 Received: from caesar.safelogic.se (caesar.safelogic.se [192.168.100.6]) by mail.safelogic.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 552A9B629 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 14:27:02 +0100 (CET) Subject: [lojban] Re: Let's be friends To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <0211190816450H.01930@neofelis> References: <20021116225301.QCGE4359.tomts9-srv.bellnexxia.net@Savv> <0211190730090E.01930@neofelis> <1037710704.9323.15.camel@caesar.safelogic.se> <0211190816450H.01930@neofelis> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-10) Date: 19 Nov 2002 14:27:02 +0100 Message-Id: <1037712422.9323.31.camel@caesar.safelogic.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-archive-position: 2643 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: d95mback@dtek.chalmers.se Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Martin =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Norb=E4ck?= From: Martin =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Norb=E4ck?= Reply-To: d95mback@dtek.chalmers.se X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out tis 2002-11-19 klockan 14.16 skrev Pierre Abbat: > On Tuesday 19 November 2002 07:58, Martin Norbäck wrote: > > tis 2002-11-19 klockan 13.30 skrev Pierre Abbat: > > 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. > > "metaphorical extension" AFAIU means that it can be used with that meaning in > a tanru, even if the gismu by itself doesn't mean that. So it's a bit wrong to call a dolphin a finpe, but xajyfinpe is ok? Or can you use a gismu metaphorically as well? My main point was that there is no difference in a lujvo between the gismu and it's rafsi. So which form you use is irrelevant. mi'e norpan