Re: [despammed] Re: Comparison of philosophical languages
|From:||James Landau <neurotico@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, January 19, 2003, 20:14|
>> On Saturday 18 January 2003 6:33 pm, Garth Wallace wrote:
>>>Andrew Nowicki wrote:
>>>>"H. S. Teoh" wrote:
>>>>AN> coppice = ydadebe = "noun small big plant" (an)
>>>>HST> ??? I'm not sure I understand the logic behind this.
>>>>Small plants growing from the trunk of a big plant.
>>>>AN> spruce = ynadebe = "noun religious big plant" (an)
>>>>HST> What has spruce got to do with "religious"?
>>>>Christmas tree. I goofed because firs are more
>>>>often used as the Christmas trees. Crushed needles
>>>>of spruces release a pungent odor, so I am redefining
I always thought that "spruce" was the Christmas tree. The name for the
Christmas tree plant is Norway spruce, after all. If Ygyde had a word meaning
"Christmas tree plant" in its language, I'd interpret it as either "spruce"
or more specifically "Norway spruce". But as for the religious tree, forget
about it. I thought t courts determined it was a secular symbol.
>>>For a proposed international language, Ygyde seems pretty
>> If it's religious, it means it applies to a religion. It doesn't matter
>> which, really, does it.
>Then it should apply to all trees, since in Shinto they're all sacred.
Or how about to bo trees, for Buddhism?
>It just seems that Ygyde consistently applies "religious" to mean
>"Christian". It's the same thing with a cross being "religious symbol".
"Religious shape" still sounds like "mandala" to me . . .
If not that, then the block-based temple shape they use for the religieuse