Talk:liste loi gugde

From Wikipedia

Contents

[edit] Names of Countries in Wikipedia

If the name of an article is a name (a sequence of cmevla), then periods are needed nor in front, nor after each cmevla. But in the text of the article they are needed as in any other Lojban text.

So, if the article is about {la .antiguas.}, then it should have the address {antiguas}. Inego 02:51, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

would you like to give a rational for that? i initially thought that way, but i now notice that, for example, an article about <.iecuax. pe la natsyrat.> would be called such, but without the tail it would just be <.iecuax> with the former scheme, which seems inconsistent. mi'e bobas 03:23, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
If the name of the article isn't of form {la + sequence of cmevla}, then it is written in the full form: {la glico selmikce}, or, in your case, {la .iecuax. pe la nazaRET}. If we omit {la} here, the resulting *{.iecuax. pe la nazaret.} will be ungrammatical. At the same time, the final and starting periods are never needed in names of Wikipedian articles, -- for the sake of not increasing the enthropy. Inego 14:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
i see. and don't you mean 'entropy'? mi'e bobas 16:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Heh. Entropy I mean. Thanks for correction. U nou, me not nativ Inglish speeker.Inego 00:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ma cmene so'o gugde

  • Nagorno Karabakh
    • zoi zoi nagorno zoi valsi lu cpana le cmana li'u lo slovo .i zoi zoi dağ zoi valsi lu cmana li'u lo tirkce .i lu la ma'acpan. karabax. li'u pei? mi'e Pier 06:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Tibet
    • zo .pyd. ji zo .bod? mi'e Pier 06:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cmene kanxe

zo e poi valsi na kakne lo nu pagbu lo cmevla i mi pu bastygau zo jev i ku'i mi na birti i la'a zo jol a zo kan xagmau i pe'i pei

mi zmanei zo joik. zo jev .iku'i zoi ry. jol .ry rafsi zo joi .iseni'ibo zo jol. ji'a xamgu mi'e Pier 23:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] zoi gy. Sweden gy.

ma xelfanva fale liste zbasu gasnu la'o zoi gy. Sweden gy. .i mi nslfa'i firi .i mi nitcu le xelfanva mu'i lenu ciska le roksodna citri .i mi ckire ledo sidju Stifynsemons 05:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] nuncmefanva

so are name translations acceptable? i think they are. at least one other person has suggested 'dizguhe' for belgium. mi'e bobas 06:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I think using lujvo like "bergu'e" as country names is dangerous since "bergu'e" might refer to some northern country. Using a cmene like "bergug" might be acceptable. However, I think translating names that way might be problematic because a name like "bakygug" might be harder to recognize than a name starting with "ital". I think it would be a good idea if all country names were standardized on jbovlaste. --Danogo 07:50, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
as for berguhe, thats why we use the word "la". besides that, you could use "berlutyguhe", i suppose. as for recognisability, "ropno" isnt exactly recognisable anyway. neither are most lojban words for that matter. mihe bobas 08:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
i checked jbovlaste, and it doesnt seem to have entries for any countries. when it does, we can use those and, if they arent the lujvo form, put the lujvo form in parentheses. i hope they are, though. mihe bobas 08:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I feel strongly that translating place-names is a bad idea, for a few reasons.
  1. Often names reflect archaic language. So modern Germans do not think of "Deutschland" as "country of the people", because "deutsch" no longer means "of the people" as it used to.
  2. Often names reflect a foreign language. Modern Italians do not think of "Italia" as "pasture-land" or "cattle-land" because it comes from an ancient Greek word.
  3. Even when a place-name is in the language of the residents, they do not tend to parse/translate the name. So when I hear "Springfield" or "Eighty-Four" (towns in the USA), I don't envision a field in springtime, or the digits "84".
So I support {italias} for Italy. Countries with associated gismu are trickier. For France, I use {fasygu'e}, but {fasygug} and {frans} seem valid to me.
Besides these reasons, I have yet to see examples of place-name-translation in Lojban materials or writings. Maybe you can point some out.
mi'e komfo,amonan 00:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree with komfon on this. I think this idea of translating the names of places is at odds with the normal way of doing things in Lojban. A lujvo normally refers to a general type of thing, unless one of the components of the lujvo is a cultural gismu (ketco, ropno, jungo, etc.). When referring to a unique thing, then, we would normally use a cmevla (perhaps sometimes a fu'ivla). I suggest that (except for the cases where there is an appropriate cultural gismu available) the names of countries should be cmevla that approximate the name in the local language. If there are mutliple local languages, we can either try to combine them (similarly to how the gismu were made) or use some neutral historical name.—sen (ko tavla) 00:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I also support that view. Arguments are already stated. --mi'e .emuzest. 07:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
the reason i support translation is that it's more purist, more neutral, and less arbitrary than picking a specific phase of a language and extracting a nameword from it. regardless, i think we should go with whatever they have on jbovlaste, when they do. mihe bobas 17:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)