- Home
- Get A Printable Dictionary
- Search Best Words
- Recent Changes
- How You Can Help
- valsi - All
- valsi - Preferred Only
- natlang - All
- natlang - Preferred Only
- Languages
- XML Export
- user Listing
- Report Bugs
- Utilities
- Status
- Help
- Admin Request
- Create Account
|
Discussion of "dalgeko"
Comment #1:
Gekkota?
|
Curtis W Franks (Tue Jun 24 06:33:04 2014)
|
Should this refer to any member of family Gekkota or just those of them which are typically thought of as "geckos" (belimbed lizards, for a start)?
|
-
Comment #2:
Re: Gekkota?
|
gleki (Tue Jun 24 07:00:25 2014)
|
krtisfranks wrote: > Should this refer to any member of family Gekkota or just those of them > which are typically thought of as "geckos" (belimbed lizards, for a > start)?
i would think more of Gekkonidae, but okay let it be Gekkota
|
-
Comment #3:
Re: Gekkota?
|
Curtis W Franks (Tue Jun 24 17:15:26 2014)
|
gleki wrote: > krtisfranks wrote: > > Should this refer to any member of family Gekkota or just those of them > > which are typically thought of as "geckos" (belimbed lizards, for a > > start)? > > > i would think more of Gekkonidae, but okay let it be Gekkota
I would probably prefer Gekkonidae. I know that Lojban usually aims for maximal semantic domain of reference, but I think that usefulness dominates in this case. Gekkota can get its own word. (Or, this word can be vague and each biological category can get its own word. It would introduce some redundancy though, compensated for by predictability perhaps. I still stick to my aforementioned preference.)
|
-
Comment #4:
Re: Gekkota?
|
gleki (Tue Jun 24 18:25:15 2014)
|
krtisfranks wrote: > gleki wrote: > > krtisfranks wrote: > > > Should this refer to any member of family Gekkota or just those of > them > > > which are typically thought of as "geckos" (belimbed lizards, for a > > > start)? > > > > > > i would think more of Gekkonidae, but okay let it be Gekkota > > I would probably prefer Gekkonidae. I know that Lojban usually aims for > maximal semantic domain of reference, but I think that usefulness > dominates in this case. Gekkota can get its own word. (Or, this word can > be vague and each biological category can get its own word. It would > introduce some redundancy though, compensated for by predictability > perhaps. I still stick to my aforementioned preference.)
We don't have a good rafsi for reptiles (respr- makes my tongue tied) and for marsupials. Thus dalgeko and dalko'ala but cpikakadu.
srigeko would be gecko tape.
For Gekkonidae dalgekonida, for Geckota dalgekota.
Shall we make ae=>a rule official? Shall we start writing down Linnaean=>Lojban, QuantumPhysics=>Lojban rules after all?
I prefer CCV- prefixes (and brodr- type prefixes but ofc. less since it's hard to pronounce syllabic -r- for a lot fo people) because this allows to preserve the original form of words and thus make memorizing thousands of words easier.
For elementary particles i consider using normalized suffixes as again it would save the form of terms better (but i wish to have a full table of all particles may be something like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:E6GUT.svg but i think it should be multidimensional so that we easier understand how make a compromise between the full "table" of particles and traditional nomenclature.
Chemical nomenclature is a separate beast. May be just cmevla-ize there everything paunai? "eth-an-ol" is a lujvo but not lojbanizable without losing recognizability.
|
-
Comment #5:
Re: Gekkota?
|
gleki (Wed Jun 25 13:58:25 2014)
|
http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=Lojbanization_of_scientific_terms
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|