uakci
commented
7 years ago I agree. «rirni» should be for actual biological relationships, but «mamta» and «patfu» not.
On Sep 3, 2016 10:48 AM, "solpahi" notifications@github.com wrote:
Original definition: *x1 is a mother of x2; x1 bears/mothers/acts maternally toward x2; [not
necessarily biological].*
The key here is that mamta is not necessarily biological (this is not controversial). I believe that mamta meaning both "to be a biological mother" and "to mother" is a case of (malgli) ambiguity and that mamta, if it isn't necessarily biological, has to be non-biological. mamta is a type of rirni, which also is not biological. The two senses are actually two disjointed concepts and no Lojban word should have two disjointed meanings.
A biological mother gives birth but may not ever act maternally, do any parenting or raising. Does she mamta the child? I say no.
A stranger finds an abandonned child and raises it ("maternally"), does she mamta the child? I say yes.
Another thing I've observed: People never put tenses on mamta as though mamta was a time-less relation. But parenting usually ends at some point. A grown-up who is done being parented should say lo pu mamta be mi for "she who mothered me". Similarly, a kid that gets taken away from its parents and is taken to another family would have a ba'o mamta and a ca'o mamta, because someone else is now doing the parenting, etc.
All of the above applies to patfu as well.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/CvGC/dict/issues/31, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGo4dNSZ0mSeN5AcO1aQ-6auLu-uKT_Hks5qmTRqgaJpZM4J0Qjn .
solpahi
Original definition: x1 is a mother of x2; x1 bears/mothers/acts maternally toward x2; [not necessarily biological].
The key here is that mamta is not necessarily biological (this is not controversial). I believe that mamta meaning both "to be a biological mother" and "to mother" is a case of (malgli) ambiguity and that mamta, if it isn't necessarily biological, has to be non-biological. mamta is a type of rirni, which also is not biological. The two senses are actually two disjointed concepts and no Lojban word should have two disjointed meanings.
A biological mother gives birth but may not ever act maternally, do any parenting or raising. Does she mamta the child? I say no.
A stranger finds an abandonned child and raises it ("maternally"), does she mamta the child? I say yes.
Another thing I've observed: People never put tenses on mamta as though mamta was a time-less relation. But parenting usually ends at some point. A grown-up who is done being parented should say lo pu mamta be mi for "she who mothered me". Similarly, a kid that gets taken away from its parents and is taken to another family would have a ba'o mamta and a ca'o mamta, because someone else is now doing the parenting, etc.
All of the above applies to patfu as well.