pe'a & tanru

[Andrew Smith <adms@YCO.LEEDS.AC.UK>]

coi doi skat.
.ui mi mutce ckire do le pinka be le skami se mrilu be mi ku ku bei fo do

(is that right? do I need 2 ku to join [bei fo do] to [le pinka] or just
one? [mi ku] and [le skami .. ku])

Scott says:

>>Thanks very much for explaining this to me. It illustrates one of the main
>>problems with using pe'a to mark something as 'figurative'
>>The phrase 'besna kafke', even marked as figurative meant absolutely
nothing
>>to me, as it is not used in English slang, or certainly at least not by me
>>and my acquaintances.
>Perhaps not, but, with adequate context, I understood (and was heartily
>amused by) the term upon first hearing it used.  I suspect you would have
>understood it quite easily in context.  As I recall, the exchange went
>something like:
>
>    Me:  I understand that A and B differ in the depleter.
>
>   Don: Depleter? What the heck does that mean.
>
>    Me:  Oops.  Brain fart.  I meant "I understand that A and B differ
>       in usage." "Depleter" (xaksu) and "usage" (pilno) both have
>        "use" in the gloss, and I grabbed the wrong one.
>
>I think the metaphor is obvious --- and mostly culturally neutral, as
>it only expects the culture to consider farting impolite.

OK, I'll concede that perhaps in context I might have understood the term.
But the tanru {besna kafke} doesn't expect people to consider farting
impolite, does it? It just implies that someone is (brain-like) coughing
some
gassy substance out of some orifice, I think.

>>The same problem occurs with 'brain cough'. We have, in earlier posts,
>>established that it is a bad tanru because it is not a real kafke. But, I
>>would argue, neither is it a metaphorical brain cough, UNLESS you have
heard
>>that expression in American English. From Cowan's explanation above, it
>>sounds to me like 'a momentary lapse of reason', or an 'intelligence
>>interruption' or some such.
>Hold on.  First, I disagree that we've established that it's a bad
>tanru.  I can give several examples of "good tanru" ("good" because
>they appear in official LLG papers) where {broda brode} isn't a real
>{brode}.  How about {rokcu cinfo}?  What species (selcinfo) is a stone
>lion?  Given that the notion of species has to do with genetic
>compatibility, I'd argue that any "species" one might claim for a stone
>lion is purely metaphorical.

Well, let's agree to disagree on whether it's a good tanru.
In my opininon, {rokci cinfo} must have a species, because that place
exists in the structure of the gismu. Tanru take the place structure of the
last element, so {rokci cinfo} is a rocky-type of lion of species x2.
Crucially, if it doesn't have a species, then it's not a cinfo.
And of course a stone lion isn't a lion, is it? It's a stone.
I would say that a stone lion should be translated as {cinfo rokci},
i.e. a lion-like stone of type x2 from location x3.

>How about {xunre kerfa}?  Cultures typically describe hair colors as
>red, yellow, brown, and black, because these are color terms that
>develop early enough.  Such usage becomes standardized while "orange"
>is still developing.  So what color is {xunre kerfa}?  Literally, it's
>some flavor of {narju}, but it can also be accurately described as
>{kerfa xunre}, even though it isn't really a flavor of {xunre}.

Well, I don't know. In lojban, {xunre} did not develop earlier than {narju}.
But,  {xunre kerfa} is still hair, and {kerfa xunre} is red (if you define
it so),
so they're valid tanru.
As an aside, colour terms are difficult, because cultures and people have
different definitions of how to break up the spectrum [insert numerous
examples as you wish], so I would say that you could describe a
red-headed person as {narju kerfa} or {xunre kerfa} quite happily,
according to how you split up your colour spectrum.

>Likewise, the relative size of a {cmalu plini} may be described as
>{plini cmalu}, though one would hardly say a {plini} could be {cmalu}.

Likewise again, a {cmalu plini} is a planet, and {plini cmalu} is small.
It has to be small, in aspect x2, compared to x3. Otherwise it isn't cmalu.

>Second, I'd say you have an odd notion of "metaphorical".  True,
>"temporary reason failure" or "intelligence interruption" would be
>accurate translations of the notion, but they *aren't* metaphors for
>the concept, they're the concept itself.  Webster's defines metaphor as
>"a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one
>kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a
>likeness or analogy between them (as in the ship plows the sea)".

Very probably I have got an odd notion of "metaphorical".

But I would say that in lojban you *should* translate the concept, not the
metaphor.

>A metaphor is a word or phrase which indirectly represents another.
>"The blues" is a metaphor, though strongly culture-biased, for
>"sadness" because the color blue is associated with sadness.
>"Heartburn" is a metaphor for "indigestion" because indigestion is
>often accompanied by a burning sensation in the chest.  "Brain fart" is
>a metaphor for "intelligence interruption" because the brain is
>associated with intelligence, and farting is both a faux pas and
>typically interrupts social activity.

Fair enough, but does it have a place in lojban? I'm still troubled by
{pe'a kakfe} meaning interruption.
OK, {pe'a besna} could stand for reason in my mind, but would
it in everybody's? Is it *very* different to {pe'a risna} for love?
And why use them anyway, when we've got {dicra}, {pensi} and {prami}?

I'd prefer that lojbo said what they meant exactly, rather than use {pe'a}.
There's a gismu for everything somewhere, it's just a matter of finding it!
(probably not strictly true, but you know what I mean)

>Third, as I said above, one needn't have heard the expression before
>to understand it.  One simply needs enough context to interpret it.
>Sure, a brain can't fart, but the context in which the expression
>appeared left little room for the metaphor to mean anything else
> that an "intelligence interruption".

Yes, of course you're right here about context. As I said above,
I might have understood in context. I only started reading when you two
were arguing about it. But I still don't like it as a tanru, because its x2
and x3 are meaningless, and therefore so is the whole tanru.

>I agree that cultural metaphors are dangerous, but I think that one needs
>to examine the relationship between the metaphor and the represented
concept.
>"Raining cats and dogs" is probably difficult to follow, but "athlete's
foot"
>might be easier.  With sufficient context, "big iron" as a reference to
>mainframe computers is probably fine.

I'm not sure about these. I agree that, with a context, you could say {bardu
jinme}
for a mainframe, but I wouldn't have said that it was {tirse}.
{bajra zajba jamfu}, on the other hand,  is the foot of an athlete, but it's
not a disease.

co'omi'e .andruc.
[adms@yco.leeds.ac.uk]