Re: Lojban

li [Bob LeChevalier] mi tulis la ...


> >Rest snipped for brevity. If you choose not to answer the question,
> >kindly say so!
> 
> I am saying that there are so many answers that no answer that I would
> give would necessarily be correct and unchallengeable.

So give a few of the better answers.  A language needs to be
able to express these things, and do so without a speaker having
to stop and analyse or philosophize about the precise meaning of
something.  Context plays a big part in understanding what is
said in a statement too.

> >I can only take this to mean that "s****ts" is something
> >that can't be discussed in Lojban
> 
> Of course it can.  "mela'o gy. s****ts gy." means exactly whatever the
> English word s****ts means, having borrowed it intact as non-Lojban
> text.  But few Lojbanists would choose such a copout, and no
> broadcaster would.
> 
>  and that Lojban is not a language
> >that could ever be used for daily life.
> 
> It certainly could. But the concepts that would be used would probably
> not map exactly to English language concepts.  So the broadcaster
> would say something else about what was to be broadcast, dividing the
> categories of the world differently.  That is the way languages work.

So what's the one that would map to "s****ts" as it applies here
to the act of re****ting on events related to s****t.
-------------------------------------------------
deinx nxtxr

LI SASXSEK LATIS. (http://www.nutter.net/sasxsek)