Subject: Re: [lojban] RE:literalism

From: Invent Yourself <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:14:22 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 20 Oct 2000 [email-masked] wrote:

> Thanks also for reminding us all again that tanru and lujvo are not
> separate things so that we can shift the problem off of one onto the
> other, but are rather different ways of presenting the same linguistic
> features. The, "oh, lujvo are so...., but we can avoid that by
> sticking with tanru" won't work. If we're stuck with it in lujvo, we
> are in tanru,too, but if we can avoid it in tanru, we can in lujvo, too.

There are an infinite number of tanru, but lujvo are limited by
"reasonable" size. Also, information is lost in the tanru --> lujvo
process (lujvoization? lujvoizing?) because 1. we drop cmavo, 2. we select
one of many possible meanings. So I must disagree that tanru and lujvo
face the same issues.

> Finally, it does not have to be the edge that moves in a scraping, since I 
> can scrape my knee on a stone, etc. So, the sky moves (as it does, visibly) 
> over the building. But I like "skyhead building" anyhow.

"sky scrape building" seems a lot better to me than "sky head building".

-----
"...widespread, systematic and gross violations of human rights 
perpetrated by the Israeli occupying power, in particular mass 
killings...measures which constitute...crimes against humanity.''
UN Commission on Human Rights, 19 Oct 2000