From matt.mattarn@gmail.com Fri Aug 03 05:25:51 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:25:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.171]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IGwDq-0000lZ-U8 for llg-board@lojban.org; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:25:42 -0700 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m2so524087uge for ; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:25:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=spacrSfCLbHp4SvS5ObqneHR0CSXOyPK/UrpPXWrCZrf3oKoJ4l+a+sopZvBI5f83vwShIuLAfgxQN0ah1Z+oyggX3UfXStNUQLGDeEmbJy16WDmty14muYj2nZU84wh0Ynqa56kltELai4Pa/LsFIc0AjC5AlDNJFcDjNJ/GRY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=bbg8WXeptWsWyQnw/kPVM17hSsn2SMhguHZi9Djso32rlpi4Wq1w+7ewxjzKoRH7RJt4f8nFNXm6//xYXRr+bHNj9/bcjfgYs3DtqhMY2HG3qxonAVuFxMnZPZWWnbB8jb4Og1HXxJJ4k3HBB2QekmozFEkncOzWtcyurGQvBMU= Received: by 10.78.162.4 with SMTP id k4mr816907hue.1186143936147; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:25:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.78.118.16 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 05:25:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 08:25:36 -0400 From: "Matt Arnold" To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: Translating "What Is Lojban?" Into Hindi In-Reply-To: <20070803001716.GR12963@miranda.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070802203248.GI18057@nvg.org> <20070803001716.GR12963@miranda.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.1 X-Spam-Score-Int: 1 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 314 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: matt.mattarn@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board On 8/2/07, Jay F Kominek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 10:32:48PM +0200, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote: > > > > This is so expensive that we need to think hard about how we are > > going to sell the book when it's done. Do we have an adequate > > distribution model for India? > > I'd be more concerned about the support model. So we convince N Hindi-only > or mostly-Hindi speaking Indians to take up Lojban. Do we have even N/1000 > Hindi speaking lojbanists to answer their questions when they want to go > further? Do we anticipate so many donations from them to cover the > translation of further texts? I'm open to the idea of paid translations, > but there needs to be a plan for what happens next. > > I'm also dubious about the choice of Hindi. There are certainly huge > numbers of Hindi speakers, but that isn't the only figure we need to > worry about. Rather, we need to know how many of them have the leisure > time to learn a constructed language. Then we need to know what > portion of that population doesn't already read English competently. > > -- > Jay Kominek > I respect that point of view, and you could be right in each point. Were the board to reject this expenditure, I would understand. It seems inappropriate to me for the learning materials of a culturally-neutral language to exist only in one of the six source languages (and a smattering of Spanish). Is it fair to say that ever since its inception, the Lojban community as a whole has looked forward the day that they would see that change? The reason I have pursued Hindi is that it's the only one which I see as possible. I will be the first person to be overjoyed if you show me that I'm wrong in this, but we have a choice between this language or nothing. India has a reputation for inexpensive high-quality outsourcing of white-collar labor, whereas the other source languages only have blue-collar factory outsourcing at best. Ironically, the very same grasp of English with which they can do the translation makes them the most likely to read the original. Oh well, this is the nature of pulling an effort up by the bootstraps, in which there is a chicken-and-egg problem of small output and correspondingly small reward. It's not unusual to have to start with the easiest piece of a challenge and end at the hardest. In this case that order starts with English, Spanish, Hindi. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. A language with many potential learners who have leisure time, but for whom we cannot create a translation, is not worth as much as a language with almost no potential learners for whom we can create a translation. The same bootstrapping argument applies to support. We simply will not support Hindi speakers, for the same reason that the very first Lojbanists had to self-teach back when no English speakers knew Lojban. But again, no alternative exists; the burden will be on them to self-teach no matter which choice we make here. For a Hindi speaker with a mediocre or imperfect grasp of English, this translation lowers their barrier to entry, and demonstrates to them that Lojban is serious about Hindi not being a second-class language beneath English. Whether we do this translation or do something else, the bottom line is to do *something* to fulfill our bylaws. My plan for what happens next is simple: during our terms of office, this organization should pursue its mission. Any board member opposing this translation is obligated to provide their own alternative for the Logical Language Group to pursue its mission with these funds in some other way. Taking no action to further this organization's mission is not a valid option. -Eppcott