Re: Weekly Vocab 6: to know

Christopher Wright scripsit:

> It's unthinkable that we can be more vague than the languages we're
> familiar with. There is a tendency to overcorrect this "problem" by making
> sometimes absurd distinctions.
Well, I argued (fairly successfully) that Lojban did not need a word for "tall",
given a root meaning "deep"; the view here is that whether we call something
"deep" or "tall" basically depends on whether we are at the top or the
bottom of it.  The alternative was to use the compound "vertically-long" for
"tall", which I argued was not necessary.  I was thinking explicitly of
Latin "altus".

In addition, the root "mushroom" was removed from the language on the grounds
that the root "fungus" did all the necessary work, as in Italian.

> "to advance slowly and menacingly, delivering deep terror while
> seeming absolutely confident in your success over the opponent".
Early in the Loglan Project, people advocated for roots (not compounds!)
meaning "is a bad programmer" and "respects someone's space".
I forget the latter, but the former was "terki" (as distinct from "turki" =
the bird).

> Hey! Did I exceed my posting limit for the week?
Fortunately we have no such limits yet, and aren't likely to during *my* watch.

--
XQuery Blueberry DOM                            John Cowan
Entity parser dot-com                           jcowan@reutershealth.com
    Abstract schemata                           http://www.reutershealth.com
    XPointer errata                             http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Infoset Unicode BOM                                 --Richard Tobin

Reply