## 4.13. lujvo-making examples

This section contains examples of making and scoring lujvo. First, we will start with the tanru gerku zdani (dog house) and construct a lujvo meaning doghouse, that is, a house where a dog lives. We will use a brute-force application of the algorithm in Section 4.1, using every possible rafsi.

The rafsi for gerku are:

 -ger-, -ge'u-, -gerk-, -gerku

The rafsi for zdani are:

 -zda-, -zdan-, -zdani.

Step 1 of the algorithm directs us to use -ger-, -ge'u- and -gerk- as possible rafsi for gerku; Step 2 directs us to use -zda- and -zdani as possible rafsi for zdani. The six possible forms of the lujvo are then:

 ger-zda ger-zdani ge'u-zda ge'u-zdani gerk-zda gerk-zdani

We must then insert appropriate hyphens in each case. The first two forms need no hyphenation: ge cannot fall off the front, because the following word would begin with rz, which is not a permissible initial consonant pair. So the lujvo forms are gerzda and gerzdani.

The third form, ge'u-zda, needs no hyphen, because even though the first rafsi is CVV, the second one is CCV, so there is a consonant cluster in the first five letters. So ge'uzda is this form of the lujvo.

The fourth form, ge'u-zdani, however, requires an r-hyphen; otherwise, the ge'u- part would fall off as a cmavo. So this form of the lujvo is ge'urzdani.

The last two forms require y-hyphens, as all 4-letter rafsi do, and so are gerkyzda and gerkyzdani respectively.

The scoring algorithm is heavily weighted in favor of short lujvo, so we might expect that gerzda would win. Its L score is 6, its A score is 0, its H score is 0, its R score is 12, and its V score is 3, for a final score of 5878. The other forms have scores of 7917, 6367, 9506, 8008, and 10047 respectively. Consequently, this lujvo would probably appear in the dictionary in the form gerzda.

For the next example, we will use the tanru bloti klesi (boat class) presumably referring to the category (rowboat, motorboat, cruise liner) into which a boat falls. We will omit the long rafsi from the process, since lujvo containing long rafsi are almost never preferred by the scoring algorithm when there are short rafsi available.

The rafsi for bloti are -lot-, -blo-, and -lo'i-; for klesi they are -kle- and -lei-. Both these gismu are among the handful which have both CVV-form and CCV-form rafsi, so there is an unusual number of possibilities available for a two-part tanru:

 lotkle blokle lo'ikle lotlei blolei lo'irlei

Only lo'irlei requires hyphenation (to avoid confusion with the cmavo sequence lo'i lei). All six forms are valid versions of the lujvo, as are the six further forms using long rafsi; however, the scoring algorithm produces the following results:

 lotkle 5878 blokle 5858 lo'ikle 6367 lotlei 5867 blolei 5847 lo'irlei 7456

So the form blolei is preferred, but only by a tiny margin over blokle; "lotlei" and "lotkle" are only slightly worse; lo'ikle suffers because of its apostrophe, and lo'irlei because of having both apostrophe and hyphen.

Our third example will result in forming both a lujvo and a name from the tanru logji bangu girzu, or logical-language group in English. (The Logical Language Group is the name of the publisher of this book and the organization for the promotion of Lojban.)

The available rafsi are -loj- and -logj-; -ban-, -bau-, and -bang-; and -gri- and -girzu, and (for name purposes only) -gir- and -girz-. The resulting 12 lujvo possibilities are:

 loj-ban-gri loj-bau-gri loj-bang-gri logj-ban-gri logj-bau-gri logj-bang-gri loj-ban-girzu loj-bau-girzu loj-bang-girzu logj-ban-girzu logj-bau-girzu logj-bang-girzu

and the 12 name possibilities are:

 loj-ban-gir loj-bau-gir loj-bang-gir logj-ban-gir logj-bau-gir logj-bang-gir loj-ban-girz loj-bau-girz loj-bang-girz logj-ban-girz logj-bau-girz logj-bang-girz

After hyphenation, we have:

 lojbangri lojbaugri lojbangygri logjybangri logjybaugri logjybangygri lojbangirzu lojbaugirzu lojbangygirzu logjybangirzu logjybaugirzu logjybangygirzu lojbangir lojbaugir lojbangygir logjybangir logjybaugir logjybangygir lojbangirz lojbaugirz lojbangygirz logjybangirz logjybaugirz logjybangygirz

The only fully reduced lujvo forms are lojbangri and lojbaugri, of which the latter has a slightly lower score: 8827 versus 8796, respectively. However, for the name of the organization, we chose to make sure the name of the language was embedded in it, and to use the clearer long-form rafsi for girzu, producing .lojbangirz.

Finally, here is a four-part lujvo with a cmavo in it, based on the tanru nakni ke cinse ctuca or male (sexual teacher). The ke cmavo ensures the interpretation teacher of sexuality who is male, rather than teacher of male sexuality. Here are the possible forms of the lujvo, both before and after hyphenation:

 nak-kem-cin-ctu nakykemcinctu nak-kem-cin-ctuca nakykemcinctuca nak-kem-cins-ctu nakykemcinsyctu nak-kem-cins-ctuca nakykemcinsyctuca nakn-kem-cin-ctu naknykemcinctu nakn-kem-cin-ctuca naknykemcinctuca nakn-kem-cins-ctu naknykemcinsyctu nakn-kem-cins-ctuca naknykemcinsyctuca

Of these forms, nakykemcinctu is the shortest and is preferred by the scoring algorithm. On the whole, however, it might be better to just make a lujvo for cinse ctuca (which would be cinctu) since the sex of the teacher is rarely important. If there was a reason to specify male, then the simpler tanru nakni cinctu (male sexual-teacher) would be appropriate. This tanru is actually shorter than the four-part lujvo, since the ke required for grouping need not be expressed.