Re: LUNATIC again
|From:||Logical Language Group <lojbab@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, November 10, 1998, 5:48|
>That's also the reason for entries like this:
>#2552 melan (N) *melon
> following Eng, used also for *water melon: imisye melan
>Now I admit that this is a one-line gloss, and I should have put a
>string of Latin botanical names indicating precisely which species of
>fruits can be called "melan", but I didn't because I couldn't be
>bothered. More to the point, "melan" is a loan from English, and EA has
>even borrowed the English phrase "water melon" and translated it to
>"imisye melan", rather than having a separate word for it, as languages
>sometimes do in countries where these fruits are common (eg, Spanish
>melo'n, sandia). Therefore the implication that the semantic field
>covered by "melan" is the same as the English "melon" is correct.
Fine. Sounds completely natural. I would not expect that loanwords would necessarily
need more than a few words gloss if the source language is clear and the
semantics remain unaltered. Only if most words of the language are "loanwords"
would I start to wonder. Your analysis response to "invented" was as long and
complex as your definition of "melan" is short. the former is the sign of
extensive thought about semantics.