Joel Shellman wrote:
Some thoughts on this topic (please forgive my newbiness as this is
the beginners list :)
Each of those definitions (at least the ones that are indeed quite
different) could/should have a different word in lojban. So, if your
intention is to state a structure made of triangles, use that type of
word. If your intention is to state a spherical structure of struts,
then a word could be for that.
That is precisely my intent in posting all those definitions %^)
There is absolutely no reason why there should be one Lojban word for
any given English word, and if there were, that would support the
argument that Lojban is just a fancy code.
I'm sorry, I'm new here, but tell me this... if someone knew all the
basic vocabulary and the rules for creating new words, would they have
a good chance of knowing what rekyboldi'u means without any context
when they see it for the first time? What about with context?
A frame-ball building. Sounds like it would be reasonably easy to
figure out. The proof of such puddings is in "phone-games" aka "whisper
down the line", which is something any would-be translator should
participate in, to get an idea of how easily their tanru and lujvo are
understood.
I would think one of the wonderful benefits of lojban is that you can
do this--create a word that is very precise in what you mean. Granted,
that would mean an enormous vocabulary, thus my question--can someone
decompose a word they've never seen before and most likely understand
what it should mean?
I would say that there are many who could get the approximate meaning.
Getting a place structure identical to that which the originator might
have intended is a bit harder, especially without several places filled in.
lojbab
