From lojbab@lojban.org Mon Jul 17 13:00:48 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3575 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2000 20:00:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 17 Jul 2000 20:00:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-1.cais.net) (205.252.14.71) by mta1 with SMTP; 17 Jul 2000 20:00:47 -0000 Received: from bob (136.dynamic.cais.com [207.226.56.136]) by stmpy-1.cais.net (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e6HK0kW65274 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:00:46 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from lojbab@lojban.org) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000717154946.00b70610@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: vir1036/pop.cais.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:00:06 -0400 To: "lojban@onelist.com" Subject: Re: Swearing with tanru [was : Re: "which?" (was: RE: [lojban] centripetality: subset vs component] In-Reply-To: <39734AED.44FAFBC@bilkent.edu.tr> References: <39733D14.E4987E90@bilkent.edu.tr> <39734793.32278CEA@reutershealth.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" At 09:05 PM 07/17/2000 +0300, Robin wrote: >John Cowan wrote: > > Robin wrote: > > > (a) impermissable culturally specific metaphor (i.e. malglico)? > > > (b) not really malglico (because in virtually no culture would someone > > > appreciate being called a dog) but meaningless if talking to a human and > > > tautological if talking to a dog? > > > (c) not exactly "high Lojban" but permissable given the communicative > > > context (i.e. the listener would automatically fill in the missing > > > {pe'a} or read the sentence as "le do mamta cu simla lo'e gerku")? > > > > Probably all three. But the righteous way is to form a tanru with > > "mabla" and a fair description of the person: thus "you are a $#(@# > redhead" > > is "do mabla ke xunre se kerfa". In Lojban, there are an infinite > > number of swear-words! > > >Am I wrong in assuming that {lo mabla ke xunre se kerfa} presumably does >not mean "you are a ***ing redhead" in the sense of "you are a redhead, >which is something I find objectionable" (which is how I would normally >interpret the English)? I would interpret the tanru as "You are a >redhead of an objectionable kind" i.e. many redheads are perfectly OK, >but you happen to be one of those mabla ones. That is a possible interpretation, but John should have suggested the same quote, replacing "ke" with "le" (use the place structure, Luke). "You REDHEAD!" Alternatively, make it "xunre se kerfa mabla" (redheaded ***er). >Is there a way to >construct the tanru to be really bigoted and imply that _all_ redheads >are mabla, which I think expresses the english "****ing redhead" better. Maybe include "cnano": typically-mabla redhead lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org