nestor wrote:
> Hi, I am a newbie making fuhivla, I agree with you to the fact that
venzla
> appears to be a lujvo because is a 6 letter word, but on the other side
i
> think that the fewer gismo the better the language, because is simpler,
> anyway I suppose it will be a matter of votes to decide which way to
> follow, the other ones I have done are:
>
> klombia for Colombia
> kuardo for Ecuador
> venzla for Venezuela or
> venzula for Venezuela
>
> naming countries with the two letter iso standard is not very intuitive,
> in my opinion.



don't you think ISO-fu'ivla are better?
https://drive.google.com/#folders/0Bxngu1CNj7wdVU1yVHpWV2hhM0k ?
Look at gugdevu'e.

Comment #5: Re: Better substitution

nestor diaz (Thu Mar 13 18:26:42 2014)

gleki wrote: > don't you think ISO-fu'ivla are better? Still in doubt, at least not for an informal conversation, maybe for technical documents, but IMHO the country brivla should resemble a similar name like the one we use to refer to, but I found hard to include all of them because of lojban strict grammatical rules which I consider veeeeery good, anyway we can refer to them like a cmene, so I think that's the best way. This system must have a way to delete fuhivla or mark for deletion.

Comment #6: Re: Better substitution gleki (Fri Mar 14 07:32:47 2014) nestor wrote: > gleki wrote: > > don't you think ISO-fu'ivla are better? > > Still in doubt, at least not for an informal conversation, maybe for > technical documents, but IMHO the country brivla should resemble a similar > name like the one we use to refer to, but I found hard to include all of > them because of lojban strict grammatical rules which I consider veeeeery > good, anyway we can refer to them like a cmene, so I think that's the best > way. This system must have a way to delete fuhivla or mark for deletion. The system allows you to downvote any word. Comment #7: Re: Better substitution Curtis W Franks (Sun Mar 16 08:31:18 2014) nestor wrote: > gleki wrote: > > don't you think ISO-fu'ivla are better? > > Still in doubt, at least not for an informal conversation, maybe for > technical documents, but IMHO the country brivla should resemble a similar > name like the one we use to refer to […] I think that we should treat Lojban whensoever possible as if it were meant to become a native and only language of some large population of speakers, as best as we can. That means that lujvo should be preferred to zi'evla (and, in particular, fu'ivla) whensoever doing so is reasonable. But, also, when we make zi'evla, we should do so algorithmically, culturally-neutrally, and with as little reference to outside knowledge as possible while being sensible, logical, and predictable about the word and doing so. Thus, native only-lojban speakers will not presumably know the names of countries to which we do not expose them (by having those words in the vocabulary of Lojban); if we teach them that VE means Venezuela and is the only word for it, then thar will be natural to them - and in fact the systematicness of the scheme would be beneficial to them; therefore, we should make it so. Note also that going with "VE" is just as meaningful to someone who has never before heard it as going with "Venezuela" would be.