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

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 05:19:12 -0400

At 05:08 PM 10/19/2000 -0400, Invent Yourself wrote:
>On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, [iso-8859-1] Alfred W. Tueting (Tüting) wrote:
> > I'm all other than sure about this well-sounding statement: there are
> > real horrible-looking (-sounding) lujvo monsters, maybe
> > only appropriate for silly machines (sometimes worse than Assembler
> > encoded text).
> > I'm pleading for short-/conciseness rather than pedantic
> > descriptiveness. (That doesn't mean that I do not agree with xorxes.
> > to
> > "respect" the places, or with maikl. to avoid fancy metaphors). Lujvo
> > should be "convincing" from their meaning and concise to
> > keep them in memory (they should become "lokshe").
>
>Lujvo are not as commonly needed as is commonly thought. There should be a
>lujvo for toothbrush, but do we need one for rapist?

If we want to talk about someone who commits the crime of rape, we need a 
word for the crime and the perpetrator. Certainly a tanru will get 
bothersome if repeated multiple times in the discussion.

>"Rapist", recalling
>the long discussions held recently, fought by about 5 equally valid and
>conflicting positions, is a word that cries out for a specific tanru when
>it is introduced into a discussion.

So probably we need (at least) 5 lujvo for rapist, each with its own valid 
place structure and emphasizing some aspect that the speaker is trying to 
access. There probably is no short lujvo that will capture all uses of the 
English word "rape".

Probably "force-sex-crime" will work in most but leave loopholes - places 
we would use English "rape" that don't fit, and maybe a few situations 
where the word would fit that are not expressed with English "rape".

>Rather than isolate the canonical
>definition among the several closely-related yet different choices offered
>during the debate, a tanru would specify the exact spin desired.

So would a lujvo made from that tanru. Those among us who would make 
lujvo, would do so as abbreviations for a tanru that we might need to use 
often enough even in one piece of writing to make writing (and reading) the 
tanru cumbersome. Indeed, I think that the best way to introduce a coined 
lujvo is to use the defining metaphor the first time and then 
parenthetically add the lujvo form which would be used in later places 
instead of the tanru.

lojbab
--
lojbab [email-masked]
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