From graywyvern@hotmail.com Sun Oct 22 15:20:47 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: graywyvern@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_1_0); 22 Oct 2000 22:20:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 10912 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2000 22:20:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Oct 2000 22:20:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.237.195) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Oct 2000 22:20:46 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 22 Oct 2000 15:20:45 -0700 Received: from 63.25.48.163 by lw7fd.law7.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 22 Oct 2000 22:20:45 GMT X-Originating-IP: [63.25.48.163] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] RE:literalism Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 22:20:45 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Oct 2000 22:20:45.0565 (UTC) FILETIME=[529492D0:01C03C76] From: "michael helsem" >From: pycyn@aol.com li'o >(BTW, maikl's {botpi >zi'o} was one of the best bits of non-literalness in a long time. I still >wish I knew whether it was calculated, or accidental i certainly did not consider that metaphorical, or else i would have said "FU'EPE'A BOTPI ZI'O FU'O". li'o >The >vocabulary of Lojban has to expand beyond the 6000 concepts or so that are >encoded in the gismu in their various places. And there are only three >ways >to go: borrowing, creation, or metaphor you don't have to have a single word for it to have a new concept. whatever you call it, that will simply remind you of the whole explanation (& a really new concept does have to be explained in the first place). it's a nickname & not the whole thing. _________________________________________________________________________ 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.