From a.rosta@v21.me.uk Tue Jul 26 16:52:03 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:52:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from heineken.flexi-surf.co.uk ([62.41.128.20]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.52) id 1DxZDJ-0004t0-3y for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:52:01 -0700 Received: from sonyvaio ([217.140.36.62]) by heineken.flexi-surf.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id j6QKKmH10471 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:20:49 +0100 Message-ID: <01e901c5923c$fe9d4560$973e0751@sonyvaio> From: "And Rosta" To: References: <20050716010140.GU2444@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <42D95380.802@lojban.org> <20050718044439.GE2444@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <42DB5132.1040507@lojban.org> <925d1756050722083624970a05@mail.gmail.com> <007d01c58f19$acc170c0$973e0751@sonyvaio> <925d175605072414283ba9d1a5@mail.gmail.com> <011301c590a9$95475540$973e0751@sonyvaio> <925d175605072418357fc3e9a0@mail.gmail.com> <016e01c5917a$2ba04ad0$973e0751@sonyvaio> <925d1756050726062841c9700b@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [llg-members] Re: Supplicatory Model: papri Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 00:19:14 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 59 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@v21.me.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members xorxes: > On 7/25/05, And Rosta wrote: > ... >> > and if you click on "previous page" a few times, you >> > get to the first page. >> >> Well yes of course, given that English calls webpages 'pages', this is >> what you'd expect, but it's a bit illogical to adduce this in a >> discussion >> of how apposite the metaphor is. > > As logical or illogical as bringing up the PageUp and > PageDown keys in support of the page as screen metaphor. Not so; but no point recapitulating now the logic of the discussion that led up to this. >> Of course, if this has become an international calque, then >> it is legitimate to ask whether Lojban should use the same calque, & I'd >> be sympathetic to such an argument. > > It is used in the Romance languages (and in Esperanto), but > I wouldn't know if non-Romance languages use it. > >>But on purely semantic grounds, cukta >> seems preferable to papri, for reasons given in earlier messages. > > I think {cukta} is ovecrowded, conflating two clearly > different relationships: author-work-(audience) on the > one hand, and container-content-(medium) on the other. > It makes little sense to me to have a word that relates > the container of the work with the author of the work. > It's a good thing Lojban only has five vowels or it might > have included places for the publisher of the book, the > copyright holder, the library it belongs to, and who knows > what else. FWIW, I agree with this, as might be expected. All I contend is that if purely semantic criteria are taken into consideration, cukta is apter for "webpage" than any gismu whose sense is any of the senses of English "page". > > Some differences I see between a cukta and a webpage: > - A webpage can be blank. A cukta requires a se cukta. Good point. > - A webpage can be written on and modified, it can evolve > (for example a wiki page). A book (as in literary work) is > not a book until it is finished, and once it is finished, it > doesn't change. "Writing on a wiki page" is much more > like "writing on a page" (i.e. adding something to it) > than like "writing a book" (i.e. creating it). A text can evolve through drafts, or even be dynamic, as in some experimental poetries. "Writing on a wiki page" is like the process (as opposed to result) reading of "writing a text". When I write on a wiki page it feels like making additions to a document, not like making additions to what is on a single physical page -- there is no sense of spatial boundedness, of notes in the margins, of trying to write small so as to squeeze a lot into limited space, or suchlike. > -A webpage can contain a form where you are asked to > fill in your personal info. I would hardly call a paper booklet > with blanks for the insertion of information a cukta, but > I wouldn't mind calling it a selpapri. Another good point. > But my argument is not really about how good or bad {cukta} > is for "webpage". All I'm saying is that {papri} provides a good > metaphor for it, and it being the natural first choice, there > is no need to go looking for something else. Perhaps the best resolution would be to see papri not as a strict translation of any sense of "page", but rather as a generalized container for information. Then papri would look to be the best choice. --And.