jbovlaste
a lojban dictionary editing system
User:
Pass:

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 "serlaxi"
[parent] [root]
Comment #1: Connotations
Curtis W Franks (Fri Mar 25 03:48:38 2016)

While this definition says that it is synonymous with that of
"serlaximorfa", I propose the following: Pursuant to my philosophy that
zi'evla which are derived directly from taxonomic nomenclature and which
match it as well as Lojban grammar allows, especially those for which this
derivation is clear, should mean "x_1 is a member of [taxon], being of
subtaxon x2" (possibly with a third terbri for the standard of
definition/classification), "serlaximorfa should take this role (where
the relevant taxon is Selachimorpha) where?s this word should be more
generic and apply to anything which may be called a shark (even
colloquially) without any assertion as to scientific classification and
where the standard is understood to be an agreement between the utterer and
the audience (with the former dominating). This will typically be
approximately equivalent to taxon Chondrichthyes, but it need not be so. In
this way, this word would be far more like "finpe" and the other Lojban
gismu (and some other zi'evla). If my philosophy is generally adopted,
especially with the third terbri, the actual denotations of the words could
differ, although they would remain obviously closely related.

Comment #2: Re: Connotations
Curtis W Franks (Fri Mar 25 03:53:05 2016)

Notes/edits:

> definition/classification), "serlaximorfa should take this role (where

I forgot to close my quote. Treat the quote symbol as the word "zo" here
(but not necessarily elsewhere).

> the relevant taxon is Selachimorpha) where?s this word should be more

This should read (with) "whereas".

Comment #3: Re: Connotations
gleki (Fri Mar 25 06:54:09 2016)

krtisfranks wrote:
> While this definition says that it is synonymous with that of
> "serlaximorfa", I propose the following: Pursuant to my philosophy that

> zi'evla which are derived directly from taxonomic nomenclature and which
> match it as well as Lojban grammar allows, especially those for which
this
> derivation is clear, should mean "x_1 is a member of [taxon], being of
> subtaxon x2" (possibly with a third terbri for the standard of
> definition/classification), "serlaximorfa should take this role (where
> the relevant taxon is Selachimorpha) where?s this word should be more
> generic and apply to anything which may be called a shark (even
> colloquially) without any assertion as to scientific classification and
> where the standard is understood to be an agreement between the utterer
and
> the audience (with the former dominating). This will typically be
> approximately equivalent to taxon Chondrichthyes, but it need not be so.
In
> this way, this word would be far more like "finpe" and the other Lojban

> gismu (and some other zi'evla). If my philosophy is generally adopted,
> especially with the third terbri, the actual denotations of the words
could
> differ, although they would remain obviously closely related.


I'm opposed to making any nomenclature basic.

We have folk nomenclature like that of curnu, we have copies of
neo-Linnaean that is official modern-days scientific nomenclature, we may
have creationists' nomenclature and we may have something purely Lojbanic
like tirxu.

So serlaxi is more like tirxu.

For Lojbanizing Linnaean names a precise mechanism should be devised
preferably making conversion back from Lojban into Latin unambiguous like
ROT13. I'm not sure whether that is possible unless we use pseudo-rafsi
prefixes.

Something like xondrixtiie would do for now IMO.

Comment #4: Re: Connotations
Curtis W Franks (Fri Mar 25 10:42:47 2016)

gleki wrote:
> krtisfranks wrote:
> > While this definition says that it is synonymous with that of
> > "serlaximorfa", I propose the following: Pursuant to my philosophy
that
>
> > zi'evla which are derived directly from taxonomic nomenclature and
which
> > match it as well as Lojban grammar allows, especially those for which
> this
> > derivation is clear, should mean "x_1 is a member of [taxon], being of
> > subtaxon x2" (possibly with a third terbri for the standard of
> > definition/classification), "serlaximorfa should take this role
(where
> > the relevant taxon is Selachimorpha) where?s this word should be more
> > generic and apply to anything which may be called a shark (even
> > colloquially) without any assertion as to scientific classification and

> > where the standard is understood to be an agreement between the utterer

> and
> > the audience (with the former dominating). This will typically be
> > approximately equivalent to taxon Chondrichthyes, but it need not be
so.
> In
> > this way, this word would be far more like "finpe" and the other
Lojban
>
> > gismu (and some other zi'evla). If my philosophy is generally adopted,
> > especially with the third terbri, the actual denotations of the words
> could
> > differ, although they would remain obviously closely related.
>
>
> I'm opposed to making any nomenclature basic.

You will have to explain what you mean by that.

>
> We have folk nomenclature like that of curnu, we have copies of
> neo-Linnaean that is official modern-days scientific nomenclature, we may

> have creationists' nomenclature and we may have something purely Lojbanic

> like tirxu.
>
> So serlaxi is more like tirxu.

I can agree that "serlaxi" is/should be more like "tirxe" than
"serlaximorfa" is. In particular, the former is/should be more
colloquial/laic. There are some differences (most notably the additional
terbri).

>
> For Lojbanizing Linnaean names a precise mechanism should be devised
> preferably making conversion back from Lojban into Latin unambiguous like

> ROT13. I'm not sure whether that is possible unless we use pseudo-rafsi
> prefixes.

I would like to work on such a project. I think that we can make guidelines
that work often, and then there might be exceptional cases that cannot be
mapped blindly. "serlaximorfa" is actually such a word: the taxon's name
is actually "Selachimorpha", without the first "r".

>
> Something like xondrixtiie would do for now IMO.

I agree.

Comment #5: Re: Connotations
gleki (Fri Mar 25 10:56:32 2016)

krtisfranks wrote:
> gleki wrote:

> > I'm opposed to making any nomenclature basic.
>
> You will have to explain what you mean by that.

ue oise'i.

I'm opposed to making any decisions regarding more appropriate or less
appropriate nomenclatures. They all have their reasoning.

> > For Lojbanizing Linnaean names a precise mechanism should be devised
> > preferably making conversion back from Lojban into Latin unambiguous
like
>
> > ROT13. I'm not sure whether that is possible unless we use pseudo-rafsi

> > prefixes.
>
> I would like to work on such a project. I think that we can make
guidelines
> that work often, and then there might be exceptional cases that cannot be

> mapped blindly. "serlaximorfa" is actually such a word: the taxon's
name
> is actually "Selachimorpha", without the first "r".

it could be tselaximorfa under la snura ideology.

https://mw.lojban.org/papri/Rule:_respect_the_form_of_words

But again it won't restore Selachimorpha back. Even these x and f. How
do you know they were "ch" and "ph", why not "kh"/"h" and "f"?

Comment #6: Re: Connotations
Jonathan (Sat Mar 26 01:30:32 2016)

Interesting observation. It's similar to the problem I raised with
braxiiura and how common use of "crab" includes species not within the
infraorder Brachyura, thus my coinage of karkino.

Currently, jbovlaste will accept data for 69 languages.
You are not logged in.

  recent changes jbovlaste main
This is jbovlaste, the lojban dictionary system.
The main code was last changed on Wed 07 Oct 2020 05:54:55 PM PDT.
All content is public domain. By submitting content, you agree to place it in the public domain to the fullest extent allowed by local law.
jbovlaste is an official project of the logical language group, and is now headed by Robin Lee Powell.
E-mail him if you have any questions.
care to log in?