From lojban-beginners+bncCMHEmaCOBhCFgc7hBBoEPozfwg@googlegroups.com Tue Jul 06 12:14:29 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OWDb5-0004J3-7b; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:29 -0700 Received: by pwi10 with SMTP id 10sf2129145pwi.16 for ; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=4oeDVlSb/ZdTxblOWQQcxYyE6n0aSp+SBO9cty+/PpQ=; b=uPkM1Ndh8jXJmxT1gZEErqrpapGyyYNFLTvV497oMhunjWeDq028tTSI/P+armLYX+ 4QFDzz21HJqfhDup94DF40HTyfBI5UVvpKamKoxxcg1658iX0FrToe9E4xDcksX423oK JJ7WEE8Qc4j1MkaM/I0MBL9L4S8AKG6uAg1Ak= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=hHWICwHzDI7l4wiZUbP/9wLcCQnK1rutBODMARq8FToBLC0Eo9Y9YTHWieT1ikGPqJ QNvdeD/JnBwyxqKzbuofz3WMYUlBjYio+ERMskR2o3DjwE97HzjoBwiQPlO79tbb8o1z eHiJEy/XiUAXE/X9kJs8OczzMPTe5ijYNwMDA= Received: by 10.142.62.6 with SMTP id k6mr324449wfa.20.1278443653633; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:13 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.143.86.1 with SMTP id o1ls203787wfl.3.p; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.207.5 with SMTP id e5mr306964wfg.39.1278443651518; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.207.5 with SMTP id e5mr306963wfg.39.1278443651464; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pw0-f48.google.com (mail-pw0-f48.google.com [209.85.160.48]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id u29si5144572wfh.0.2010.07.06.12.14.10; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:10 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.160.48; Received: by pwj2 with SMTP id 2so1343619pwj.35 for ; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.170.2 with SMTP id s2mr6119063wfe.241.1278443650224; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.191.1 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Jul 2010 12:14:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100302162057.GA14827@alice.local> <20100706004832.GL23879@digitalkingdom.org> <20100706164224.GA30521@alice.local> Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 13:14:10 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: lo do ckiku ma zvati From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd32dc6a32047048abcdbc9 --000e0cd32dc6a32047048abcdbc9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Does ".i la.lojban. mo" teach them in this manner? I don't remember off the top of my head, and I lost my copy of the book long, long ago, but I do remember that it was that book, followed shortly by the CLL, with which I began teaching myself Lojban, and it is that book through which I learned the usage and elidability of terminators. On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Lindar wrote: > > Not eliding those terminators makes even the simplest statements seem > > horribly complicated. I believe that the best way to teach elidable > > terminators is to teach them in such constructs as they are NOT elidable. > To > > tell someone "This word means this, but is hardly ever used for this > > reason", likely tells that person "This isn't important, don't bother > > remembering it". But to say instead, "This new word here, which means > this, > > is required in the sentence for this reason", seems to myself to have > more, > > um, staying power. > > I'm sorry, this is a horrible idea. > In my experience I know this, and all of the newest teaching material > reflects this. Teach terminators as if they're required, and don't > even mention that {cu} exists. It's possible to go for months without > using {cu}, so why teach it until it's necessary (namely when > sentences start to sound like "kei ku kei ku kei kui *selbri*")? > > Which do you think is easier? > 1. "Yeah, in this one particular circumstance you need this thing > called "ku" that you just have to use because you can't use "cu" > there, but you still have to have something there... cos... I said > so... > > 2. "Well, now here's a cute trick. Right here, we don't actually need > "ku", because it reads the same either way." > > Sometimes you need it for random strange reasons with convoluted > rules, or you learn that you always need it and sometimes it can be > left off. > > For pedagogical reasons, option 2 has proven time and time again to be > the better alternative that results in much better diction/word-choice/ > phrasing. Please don't teach or use {cu} until you've gotten well past > things like abstractions, and even then, don't use it unless it's > absolutely necessary for the sake of brevity (ex: {.i lo nu mi broda > be lo brode be lo brodi bei lo brodo be lo brodu cu co'e} instead of > {.i lo nu mi broda be lo brode be lo brodi ku bei lo brodo be lo brodu > ku be'o ku be'o ku be'o ku kei ku co'e}). > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lojban Beginners" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. > > -- mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. --000e0cd32dc6a32047048abcdbc9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Does ".i la.lojban. mo" teach them in this manner? I don't re= member off the top of my head, and I lost my copy of the book long, long ag= o, but I do remember that it was that book, followed shortly by the CLL, wi= th which I began teaching myself Lojban, and it is that book through which = I learned the usage and elidability of terminators.

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Lindar <lindarthebard@y= ahoo.com> wrote:
> Not eliding those terminators makes even the simples= t statements seem
> horribly complicated. I believe that the best way to teach elidable > terminators is to teach them in such constructs as they are NOT elidab= le. To
> tell someone "This word means this, but is hardly ever used for t= his
> reason", likely tells that person "This isn't important,= don't bother
> remembering it". But to say instead, "This new word here, wh= ich means this,
> is required in the sentence for this reason", seems to myself to = have more,
> um, staying power.

I'm sorry, this is a horrible idea.
In my experience I know this, and all of the newest teaching material
reflects this. Teach terminators as if they're required, and don't<= br> even mention that {cu} exists. It's possible to go for months without using {cu}, so why teach it until it's necessary (namely when
sentences start to sound like "kei ku kei ku kei kui *selbri*")?<= br>
Which do you think is easier?
1. "Yeah, in this one particular circumstance you need this thing
called "ku" that you just have to use because you can't use &= quot;cu"
there, but you still have to have something there... cos... I said
so...

2. "Well, now here's a cute trick. Right here, we don't actual= ly need
"ku", because it reads the same either way."

Sometimes you need it for random strange reasons with convoluted
rules, or you learn that you always need it and sometimes it can be
left off.

For pedagogical reasons, option 2 has proven time and time again to be
the better alternative that results in much better diction/word-choice/
phrasing. Please don't teach or use {cu} until you've gotten well p= ast
things like abstractions, and even then, don't use it unless it's absolutely necessary for the sake of brevity (ex: {.i lo nu mi broda
be lo brode be lo brodi bei lo brodo be lo brodu cu co'e} instead of {.i lo nu mi broda be lo brode be lo brodi ku bei lo brodo be lo brodu
ku be'o ku be'o ku be'o ku kei ku co'e}).

--
You received this message because = you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.=
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegr= oups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.




--
mu'o mi= 'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu
=

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den.
--000e0cd32dc6a32047048abcdbc9--