SNU: xorvo

[Goran Topic <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>]

First, let me repeat again: {xorvo} is very informal, intended almost as
a joke. I *do*not* want it to be an official gismu.
xrobau would be understood by the people I talk with mostly on lojban:
xorxes, dn, skot et al. It is idiolectic to me.
{xorvo} IS NOT A PROPOSED GISMU!

> 2) why do I need to memorize Xxrvatska unless I am talking to someone about
> Croatia, which in turn presumes that I know what/where Croatia is?  I think it
> is likely that if I want to talk about a specific country, i can look up the
> name of the country a couple of times.  Note that you DON'T need to memorize
>  more than one word - it is "xorvo" or "-xrvatska" that you have to memorize.
> I think it likely that -xrvatska is easier to memorize since you might
> actually see it spelled like that somewhere else.

Yes. But it is much longer. If an American politician went to enumerate the
newly formed countries of Europe, of course gugdrxrvatska or la XRvatskas.
would be used. If, on the other hand, a Croatian sofa-politician (do you
have people like that? We have many... Everybody knows everything, and
is shouting at the little TV people how stupid they are) would argue
to another of his kin using xrogu'e.

> 3) we are treading into an especially controversial ground with an example
> from the cultural gismu.  There are some (Ivan for one) who feel we have
> far too many cultural gismu in the first place - indeed that we shouldn't have
> any.  Adding cultural gismu is thus something that gets higher resistance than
> any other kind of gismu.

I agree. The selection process is entirely too arbitrary. You can't make
culturally neutral language if you have to select which cultures get
their words as roots and which need to make five-syllable borrowings. I
am not complaining, just stating the fact. And I still have to use
baxso. :)

> 5)  The problem with adding gismu is "where do you stop?"  If you are to add
> a word for Croatian, you might need one for every country of the world, and
> then because of US dominance in the community, then maybe every state in the
> US.  And that is just the cultural words.  How about jargon terminology like
> software?  How many fields do you need to cover to thoroughly cover jargon?

.iesai

> And then why did we BOTHER to put in borrowing and compounding methodologies
> into the language.  There are literally BILLIONS of lujvo with less than 4
> terms, just waiting to be discovered; there is no language on earth with a
> significant fraction of that total.  They might not help with Croatia
> (or maybe they would - you could make some appropriate lujvo from
> X-Y-South-Slavic, where Goran and friends chose the X and the Y to be
> meaningful and non-offensive to their culture).  But outside of culture-
> specifric words, the language SHOULD be quite robust enough to handle concepts
> internally.  If it is not, we have more wrong than the set of gismu.

Yep. But it's four term - and I find a two syllable word very attractive
in an ba'e informal speech. I don't propose to put it in any
of the official dictionaries. Okay?

> lojbab

co'o mi'e. goran.

--
GAT/CS/O d?@ H s:-@ !g p1(2)@ !au(0?) a- w+(+++) (!)v-@(+) C++(++++)
UU/H(+) P++>++++ L(>+) !3 E>++ N+ K(+) W--(---) M-- !V(--) -po+ Y(+)
t+@(+++) !5 !j R+@ G-@(J++) tv+(++) b++@ D++ B? e+* u@ h!$ f?(+) r--
!n(+@) y+. GeekCode v2.1, modifications left to reader to puzzle out