Subject: literalism [was: Re: [lojban] Re: looking at arjlujv.txt

From: "michael helsem" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 19:07:29 GMT

>From: [email-masked]
li'o
>Literalism

TO LE SATCI LUJVO SE JINVI TOI

>tends
>to think in terms of a very small number of possibilities and then to 
>object
>if a case does not fit any of those possibilities or even if another word
>fits those possibilities better.

what i object to is the prospect of having to live with a dictionary full of 
words that don't mean what they're supposed to mean. even if this sort of 
semantic drift has occurred repeatedly in english (since e.g. the era of LA 
GRANA DESKU), it is still possible to specify the register of english that 
is being used, with key words not found outside it. i can see how the 
shortened sort of lujvo might become, not "slang" (since that already 
presupposes a lot of uses that don't yet exist in lojban) but something like 
slang that signals its own context; however this distinction depends on 
having the longer, more accurate forms available for the same meanings...
li'o
>And most
>ugly ones come about -- not strange to say
>-- in the belief that they are being "accurate / literal / >definitional."

TOLMELBI FO MA --i can see a good case for, lojbanically, precision & 
clarity seeming more beautiful than imprecision...

li'o
>Probably one of the prides of
>the old days, however, was "blade hammer" for "hatchet, ax".

Now, this is really becoming a discussion about kennings. Kennings, i'll be 
the first to agree, are fascinating. But are they lojbanic? Would native 
lojbanists, even, ever have wanted to go beyond SIMSA to full-fledged 
metaphors?

And if we insist on using kennings, i still think MELA BRODA BRODE is the 
cat's pyjamas.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.