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 4.12 , 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:

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 cmevla 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 cmevla 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 cmevla 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.