From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Apr 16 13:51:45 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 13:51:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HdYAp-0007VF-9Q for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 16 Apr 2007 13:51:44 -0700 Received: from web56405.mail.re3.yahoo.com ([216.252.111.84]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HdYAk-0007V5-Ce for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 16 Apr 2007 13:51:42 -0700 Received: (qmail 88013 invoked by uid 60001); 16 Apr 2007 20:51:31 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=NqwOQQ+R6VbgTxFJ8Cte8JNI24pXgaRqEWu6ztsNQp4a8aNolexEfr8blprLc4h1ytaUDqrW5JBMugNQ6LPbrDrH+dVY2VnWBX3weYMjf8aCtEE+640FvIV5GVvkaz+6PlwWM3/eEQMDErYQg8ni6uf5o+XScJXKuHdsJbZTybw=; X-YMail-OSG: IhhrTI8VM1kJtMc9FvTsJMPXKB..diLc3xFgvFPH Received: from [75.2.90.54] by web56405.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 16 Apr 2007 13:51:31 PDT Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 13:51:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Nathaniel Krause Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Lojban geography and cultures To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <997837.17964.qm@web88010.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-690664501-1176756691=:88003" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <646377.88003.qm@web56405.mail.re3.yahoo.com> X-Spam-Score: 1.3 X-Spam-Score-Int: 13 X-Spam-Bar: + X-archive-position: 4271 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: nathanielkrause@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners --0-690664501-1176756691=:88003 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Andrew, Interesting questions. I think that generally you will find Lojban grammar to be a more interesting and fulfilling study that Lojban vocabulary. As some Lojbanic materials point out, Lojban has no particular semantic theory. I see the vocabulary as being mostly just a practical necessity for carrying the world's best grammar. Bear in mind that there will never be enough cultural gismu to describe everything that exists in the world of human cultural life. Most cultural items will always have to be described with cmevla or fu'ivla. A small number of cultural gismu are provided as a shortcut to make it easier to take about some commonly-discussed topics. I tend to agree that the design of the cultural gismu are sometimes a bit flawed. For instance, I don't really understand why there is a gismu for Scottish but not for Irish. Nor do I understand why so much gismu space was spent on various states of relatively small and recent historical importance, including at least one regime which might not even exist anymore in a few years (Saudi Arabia). However, I don't think these observations merit too much worry: if the shortcuts provided by cultural gismu do not seem helpful, then you just shouldn't use them. Use cmevla instead. I have a few comments on the specific points you raise: ANDREW PIEKARSKI wrote: As I have always been interested in geography and cultures, one of the first things I checked out when first encountering lojban was the lists of languages, countries and religions. Given that unnecessary ambiguity and cultural bias are supposed to be anathema to lojbanists, I was surprised to find certain problems (or misunderstandings on my part?). These are comments rather than questions, but I would love to get some response anyway. RELIGIONS - On a list that even includes a gismu for Taoism, the absence of gismu for one of the world's major religions - Hinduism - is striking. And although Confucianism may not technically be a religion, it should also be there. My understanding has been that we should use the gismu "srito" for all things Vedic, including the Sanskrit language and the Hindu religion. The lack of a term for Confucianism is a bit of an oversight. CULTURES - The gismu "kisto" is given as: x1 reflects Pakistani/Pashto culture/nationality/language in aspect x2 Since 'Pakistani' and 'Pashto' mean something completely different in English, this would seem to be a blatant error. Pakistan is a multilingual, multiethnic country with Urdu as its official language. The Pashtuns (Pashto) are one of its ethnic groups (not even the major one) and have their own language. Furthermore the Pashtuns are a or the major ethnic group of Afghanistan. Surely, the word 'Pashto' should be removed from the definition? The gismu often try to encompass a fairly broad range of ideas into one word, which can then be specified more exactly by modifiers. In this case, it does seem to have gotten too broad, lumping together two concepts which have only a loose connection. Perhaps it would be better to remove "Pakistani" from the definition instead. It might be more worthwhile to have a word for "Pashtun", since Pakistani might just as well be musxingu'e or sicmusxingu'e (assuming that "xingu'e" really does mean "India". See below.) - The gismu "xindo" is given as: x1 reflects Hindi language/culture/religion in aspect x2 While this may be technically correct, I notice "xingu'e" as the word for India in one of the lujvo lists (yes, I know they are not official) - clearly derived from this gismu. This could upset a lot of Indians who object to the identification of India with Hindi. Even a fu'ivla or 'la .indias.' would be better but...the world's second most populous country doesn't merit its own gismu or even an acceptable lujvo??? Obviously, some input from Indians (particularly non-Hindi speaking Indians) would be useful, but I see no Indian names on the subscribers lists. Yes, I made the same point when I was first learning about Lojban. I'm still not sure how to judge whether equating "xingu'e" = India and "xinbau" = Hindi is good enough or not. Since, I'm not very comfortable with it, if you want to start using "la .indias." or "la .barat." to mean India, instead, I'm with you. - The gismu "jungo" is given as: x1 reflects Chinese [Mandarin, Cantonese, Wu, etc.] culture/nationality/language in aspect x2 Even the dominant and culturally homogenious Han Chinese speak many mutually unintelligable languages. If this gismu refers to all the Chinese languages, how would you refer to 'Chinese' when, as is usually the case, what is meant is Mandarin? Could be quite confusing! I wonder what Chinese lojbanists have to say about this. I'm not sure this is a problem. It seems to me that "jugbau" means any Han Chinese language, just as "Chinese" does in English and just as "Hanyu" does in Chinese. If you want to be more specific, you could say something meaning "Standard Chinese" for Mandarin, or something like .guandonxuas. for Cantonese. If you don't specify, people will probably assume that you are referring to the standard language, and they'll probably be right. mu'o mi'e .sen. --------------------------------- Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos. --0-690664501-1176756691=:88003 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Andrew,

Interesting questions. I think that generally you will find Lojban grammar to be a more interesting and fulfilling study that Lojban vocabulary. As some Lojbanic materials point out, Lojban has no particular semantic theory. I see the vocabulary as being mostly just a practical necessity for carrying the world's best grammar.

Bear in mind that there will never be enough cultural gismu to describe everything that exists in the world of human cultural life. Most cultural items will always have to be described with cmevla or fu'ivla. A small number of cultural gismu are provided as a shortcut to make it easier to take about some commonly-discussed topics. I tend to agree that the design of the cultural gismu are sometimes a bit flawed. For instance, I don't really understand why there is a gismu for Scottish but not for Irish. Nor do I understand why so much gismu space was spent on various states of relatively small and recent historical importance, including at least one regime which might not even exist anymore in a few years (Saudi Arabia). However, I don't think these observations merit too much worry: if the shortcuts provided by cultural gismu do not seem helpful, then you just shouldn't use them. Use cmevla instead.

I have a few comments on the specific points you raise:

ANDREW PIEKARSKI <totus@rogers.com> wrote:
As I have always been interested in geography and cultures, one of the first things I checked out when first encountering lojban was the lists of languages, countries and religions. Given that unnecessary ambiguity and cultural bias are supposed to be anathema to lojbanists, I was surprised to find certain problems (or misunderstandings on my part?). These are comments rather than questions, but I would love to get some response anyway.

RELIGIONS

- On a list that even includes a gismu for Taoism, the absence of gismu for one of the world's major religions - Hinduism - is striking. And although Confucianism may not technically be a religion, it should also be there.
My understanding has been that we should use the gismu "srito" for all things Vedic, including the Sanskrit language and the Hindu religion. The lack of a term for Confucianism is a bit of an oversight.
CULTURES

- The gismu "kisto" is given as:

x1 reflects Pakistani/Pashto culture/nationality/language in aspect x2

Since 'Pakistani' and 'Pashto' mean something completely different in English, this would seem to be a blatant error. Pakistan is a multilingual, multiethnic country with Urdu as its official language. The Pashtuns (Pashto) are one of its ethnic groups (not even the major one) and have their own language. Furthermore the Pashtuns are a or the major ethnic group of Afghanistan. Surely, the word 'Pashto' should be removed from the definition?
The gismu often try to encompass a fairly broad range of ideas into one word, which can then be specified more exactly by modifiers. In this case, it does seem to have gotten too broad, lumping together two concepts which have only a loose connection. Perhaps it would be better to remove "Pakistani" from the definition instead. It might be more worthwhile to have a word for "Pashtun", since Pakistani might just as well be musxingu'e or sicmusxingu'e (assuming that "xingu'e" really does mean "India". See below.)
- The gismu "xindo" is given as:

x1 reflects Hindi language/culture/religion in aspect x2

While this may be technically correct, I notice "xingu'e" as the word for India in one of the lujvo lists (yes, I know they are not official) - clearly derived from this gismu. This could upset a lot of Indians who object to the identification of India with Hindi. Even a fu'ivla or 'la .indias.' would be better but...the world's second most populous country doesn't merit its own gismu or even an acceptable lujvo??? Obviously, some input from Indians (particularly non-Hindi speaking Indians) would be useful, but I see no Indian names on the subscribers lists.
Yes, I made the same point when I was first learning about Lojban. I'm still not sure how to judge whether equating "xingu'e" = India and "xinbau" = Hindi is good enough or not. Since, I'm not very comfortable with it, if you want to start using "la .indias." or "la .barat." to mean India, instead, I'm with you.
- The gismu "jungo" is given as:

x1 reflects Chinese [Mandarin, Cantonese, Wu, etc.] culture/nationality/language in aspect x2

Even the dominant and culturally homogenious Han Chinese speak many mutually unintelligable languages. If this gismu refers to all the Chinese languages, how would you refer to 'Chinese' when, as is usually the case, what is meant is Mandarin? Could be quite confusing! I wonder what Chinese lojbanists have to say about this.

I'm not sure this is a problem. It seems to me that "jugbau" means any Han Chinese language, just as "Chinese" does in English and just as "Hanyu" does in Chinese. If you want to be more specific, you could say something meaning "Standard Chinese" for Mandarin, or something like .guandonxuas. for Cantonese. If you don't specify, people will probably assume that you are referring to the standard language, and they'll probably be right.

mu'o mi'e .sen.

Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos. --0-690664501-1176756691=:88003--