Re: proposing a lujvo

[Lee Daniel Crocker <lcrocker@CALWEB.COM>]

> >Really?  We don't have to reach an explicit
> >agreement on the place structure of the lujvo?
>
> My undestanding is that lujvo are metaphors. As such, there is no explicit
> designation as to what they mean. Presumably, some lujvo will  come to be
> accepted as specific mappings in lojban semantic space, and will become
> "words" whose metaphorical ambiguity will be lessened by conventional usage.

That's not the way I read the literature about Lojban at all, nor do I
think that's a useful interpretation.  It seems to me that ordinary tanru
are flexible metaphors, open to interpretation and ad hoc coinage, but
that lujvo are only created when a certain specific meaning is used
commonly enough to merit forming a single word for it, and thereby making
it listable and its meaning no longer ambiguous.

Hmm.  Now I have Lojbanize my name to sign off.  zo lis. doesn't sound
right.  zo les. would work, or zo daniel.  Guess I'll settle for

co'omi'e les.
--
Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com>  <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html>
"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC