Re: sera'aku SNU: ki'e doi skot.

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

>Describing a culture as a two-part lujvo.  This seems an extraordinary idea.
>Is it possible?  For instance, how does one do Irish?

I proposed at one time making skoto broad enough to cover all Celtics, at which
point Irish is simply west-celtic.  Not sure if we agreed to this, of course.
But the precedent is already there.  We have had proposed New-latin for Romance
or possibly Italian, andif the former, then cabna-latin for Italian.

There have been compunds of merko proposed to handle the "native ASmericans"
but no consensus was achieved - I think "early-American" was considered
better than "born=native=American" which is hopelessly malglico.

We DID plan on "south-slavic" to refer to the general class, but no one had
suggested any specifics for the particular south slavic cultures.  There
was also some proposal to handle belarussian (white-russian would be malrusko)
and Ukrainian before we added a gismu for the latter.

Plattdeutsch might be "sea-edge-German".  Dutch might be "West-German".
I will let others have fun continuing.  But the real decision for a given
culture should get some input from that culture.  We have too many cases
of cultures being named in another language by people of that language
choosing an inappropriate or even insulting metaphor.  (I believe Russian
"nemetskiy" is from an underlying insulting metaphor for the Germans, for
 example).

lojbab