From thinkit8@lycos.com Sat Jul 14 02:13:37 2001
Return-Path: <thinkit8@lycos.com>
X-Sender: thinkit8@lycos.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 14 Jul 2001 09:13:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 53197 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 09:13:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Jul 2001 09:13:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO jk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.92) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Jul 2001 09:13:36 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: thinkit8@lycos.com
Received: from [10.1.10.134] by jk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Jul 2001 09:13:36 -0000
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 09:13:34 -0000
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Taxonomy
Message-ID: <9ip2fu+q8b8@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <01071404430708.01127@neofelis>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 446
X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster
X-Originating-IP: 24.5.121.32
From: thinkit8@lycos.com

--- In lojban@y..., Pierre Abbat <phma@o...> wrote:
> I have noticed a cladistic bias in the terms used for taxonomy. I 
am not a
> cladist, and even cladists have to talk to non-cladists sometimes, 
so I feel
> there should be words for kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, 
genus, and
> species. Any suggestions?
> 
> phma

they are so arbitrary anyway...i'd just as soon use "klesi xi" pa re 
ci vo mu xa ze, for kingdom, phylum, and so on.