[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 6:56 PM, selpa'i <seladwa@hidden.email> wrote: > > Roots that have only two consonants are automatically monosyllabic, e.g. > _lk_ [l@k]. Some of these will even stay monosyllabic after a vowel of > the desinence is added, e.g. _pr_ -> _pra_ stays very short. Such roots > are very valuable and should be given to the most useful words > (probabably things that are handled via TAGs in Lojban (tenses etc) and > some additional words that are specifically needed in Xorban. Yes, that's why I have for the most part avoided using two consonant roots. I don't want that valuable space to be filled up before we have a better idea of what we'll be needing. > Lojban: x1 knows that x2 (du'u) is true about x3 [...] > Gua\spi: x1 knows that x2 is x3:+2. Is it easy to say "John knows many things about rabbits" in Gua\spi? That kind of thing is the only explanation I have found for the otherwise strange "about" places in Lojban predicates like "djuno". > I'd like for Xorban's gimste to have no holes at all. Just throw in > everything that people have always wanted (that is, don't just copy the > lojban gimste). The way I see it, we are just using the Lojban gimste as a convenient source of vocabulary for our examples, it doesn't mean that they will go directly into the Xorban dictionary when we get to that. > This brings up a question I've wanted to ask for a while. Do Xorban > predicates have no implicit zo'e in them? If you have, say, klm (klama), > and you say klma'a, is this equivalent to klama zi'o zi'o zi'o zi'o? Yes, I think so. The stem klm- would correspond to a whole family of predicates of different adicities rather than to a single predicate. > > I see cosmetic similarities to Lojban, because it was Jorge who came > > up with the "skin" (the look and feel) and he evidently has a > > fondness for Lojban. > > I hope so. I'd be sad if he left us. (Btw, xorxes, are you going to > translate Through the Looking Glass? :P You did the first one, now only > you can translate the second one or it wouldn't be the same styles in > each book. Maybe we could do it together?) Some day, perhaps. I already translated the Jabberwocky once. :) co ma'a xrxe