Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 14:43:07 -0800 (PST)
From: RexScientiarum <amt2839@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-ID: <17229123.4939.1331160187554.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yncc26>
In-Reply-To: <201203071528.01767.phma@phma.optus.nu>
References: <13652222.419.1331146240191.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynes7>
 <201203071528.01767.phma@phma.optus.nu>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Biological taxonomy and other 'esoteric' vocabularies
 like  chemical nomenclature
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_4938_16453817.1331160187553"
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_4938_16453817.1331160187553
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Yeah, I know on the taxonomy.  What I meant was that it is (sort of) 
regulated by by several groups like ICN (formerly ICBN) and ICZN, among 
others.  But w/e, that is probably irrelevant (I'll explain why I even 
brought it up later). Still, my main question is how do we talk about these 
sorts of things in lojban?  Is there a cmavo that says: "Binomial follows'? 
or 'IUPAC preffered name follows'? Or do we just use {la}, {la'o}, and 
{zoi} or w/e?  

I HAD assumed that taxonomy, at least, would be treated in one of those two 
ways (because, as you said, it is always treated as a foreign language, 
hence why it is italicized in print or *supposed *to be underlined when 
handwritten) but it looks as if other community members have already begun 
to lojbanize taxonomic names so I thought MAYBE there is some feeling that 
there is a need to lojbanize biological classification for whatever reason 
(which is why I ask, and I thought maybe there was some feeling that the 
current Linnaean method based primarily on Latin and some Greek and written 
in the Roman alphabet wasn't a universal, culturally/scientifically 
unbiased method. Idk, just trying to understand/rationalize why someone 
thought there had to be a lojban name for eubacteria {fadjurme} and the 
like).

As far as IUPAC goes, all I meant was that I don't know how IUPAC works 
exactly in other languages, other than the fact that it is different from 
IUPAC nomenclature in English.  I don't need a description of how to IUPAC 
naming works, at least in English, I already know how that works.  Maybe I 
was a bit misleading when I said I didn't have an esoteric understanding of 
because I DO understand it, I just wouldn't claim to be an expert qualified 
to write the lojban IUPAC rules and that hopefully some well 
respected career chemist happened to speak lojban and WOULD be qualified to 
write the lojban IUPAC rules.  I was trying to be humble; of course now I 
am probably needlessly getting defensive over my 'geek' ego but so be it. 
 I know you weren't trying to be derogatory or anything so please don't 
take anything I say in a bad way.  As far as speaking lojban, however, I AM 
in fact a complete 'noob'.  (It is a good point you made though about how 
unlike Indo-European languages IUPAC nomenclature is)

Anyway...I digress, so lets continue.  Because IUPAC names *are *language 
specific (despite the fact that the English is becoming more universally 
accepted) it seems DOES seem malglico to just default to English IUPAC 
(malglico for the same reasons Robin listed in his essay here: 
http://neptune.spaceports.com/~words/ial.html that English shouldn't be an 
International Auxiliary Language).

As you said there isn't much room left in lojban for all the affixes (which 
I had suspected might be the case) used in IUPAC nomenclature.  As 
mentioned earlier, I am a complete lojban 'noob' so this might be a stupid 
question but is there some way that a cmavo or something could be used to 
denote "Hey we're talking about a chemical nomenclature here!" and thus 
allow the 'grammar' rules within the limiters to be tweaked to be more 
IUPAC friendly while still keeping the nomenclature 'lojbanic' in the sense 
that it is unique to lojban, uses lojban valsi and characters (in w/e 
orthography), and phonology? Would not a similar system be viable for, say, 
a unique lojban taxonomy as well?  (Since it seems, as mentioned earlier, 
that some lojban speakers [not me necessarily] appear to think biological 
taxonomy needs to be lojbanized as well.) 

Wasn't there some sort of system similar to this idea proposed for a Polish 
math system or w/e? (Not that I know what that is, Polish math I mean.  I 
am guessing that it has to do with the fact that math terminology isn't 
actually universal, something like the difference between British and a US 
billion, trillion, quadrillion, etc.?).  Now I probably am sounding really 
stupid but you'll just have to forgive me for being the ignorant American 
here and not knowing what Polish math is.

On Wednesday, March 7, 2012 2:28:01 PM UTC-6, Pierre Abbat wrote:
>
> All languages (except Latin itself, and maybe Greek from which many 
> taxonomic 
> roots come) treat biological taxonomic names the same way: they are marked 
> as 
> foreign (at least genus and species names) and (usually) undeclined. I 
> know of 
> two exceptions, virus species names and some unranked taxa of plants like 
> rosids, both of which are in English, at least in English. Common names, 
> such 
> as English "geranium" and Lojban "plargoni", can be derived from (or in 
> Romance languages, inherited from, such as Spanish "aves" and "avena") 
> scientific names, but may not have the same taxonomic extent. 
>
> Chemical nomenclature is a quite different beast. An IUPAC name of a 
> complicated organic chemical is very much like a long lujvo, and very 
> unlike 
> the typical word formations of Indo-European and Semitic languages, which 
> consist of a root, or a few roots joined together in IE, with a bunch of 
> prefixes, suffixes, and inflections stuck on. I think, therefore, that 
> IUPAC 
> should be done with lujvo in Lojban. But there isn't much room left for 
> all 
> the affixes used in IUPAC. There are at least three ways numbers are used 
> in 
> IUPAC: the oxidation state or valence of an atom, the number of copies of 
> a 
> group in a molecule, and the atom to which a group is attached; and it's 
> not 
> clear to me how to distinguish them in Lojban. Take for instance 1,1,1-
> trichloro-2,2-di(4-chlorophenyl)ethane (aka DDT). The numerals denote 
> which 
> atom the chlorines and phenyls are attached to; the "di" and "tri" 
> prefixes 
> mean there are three chlorines and two chlorophenyls attached to the 
> ethane.
>
> Pierre
> -- 
> Jews use a lunisolar calendar; Muslims use a solely lunar calendar.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/eJiz4pD4NaAJ.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.


------=_Part_4938_16453817.1331160187553
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yeah, I know on the taxonomy. &nbsp;What I meant was that it is (sort of) r=
egulated by by several groups like ICN (formerly ICBN) and ICZN, among othe=
rs. &nbsp;But w/e, that is probably irrelevant (I'll explain why I even bro=
ught it up later). Still, my main question is how do we talk about these so=
rts of things in lojban? &nbsp;Is there a cmavo that says: "Binomial follow=
s'? or 'IUPAC preffered name follows'? Or do we just use {la}, {la'o}, and =
{zoi} or w/e? &nbsp;<div><br></div><div>I HAD assumed that taxonomy, at lea=
st, would be treated in one of those two ways (because, as you said, it is =
always treated as a&nbsp;foreign&nbsp;language, hence why it is italicized =
in print or <i>supposed </i>to be underlined when handwritten) but it looks=
 as if other community members have already begun to lojbanize taxonomic na=
mes so I thought MAYBE there is some feeling that there is a need to lojban=
ize biological classification for whatever reason (which is why I ask, and =
I thought maybe there was some feeling that the current&nbsp;Linnaean metho=
d based primarily on Latin and some Greek and written in the Roman alphabet=
&nbsp;wasn't a universal, culturally/scientifically unbiased method. Idk, j=
ust trying to understand/rationalize why someone thought there had to be a =
lojban name for eubacteria {<span style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family=
: 'black Verdana', Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 20px;=
 text-align: left; ">fadjurme</span>} and the like).</div><div><div><br></d=
iv><div>As far as IUPAC goes, all I meant was that I don't know how IUPAC w=
orks exactly in other languages, other than the fact that it is different f=
rom IUPAC nomenclature in English. &nbsp;I don't need a&nbsp;description&nb=
sp;of how to IUPAC naming works, at least in English, I&nbsp;already&nbsp;k=
now how that works. &nbsp;Maybe I was a bit misleading when I said I didn't=
 have an esoteric understanding of because I DO understand it, I just would=
n't claim to be an expert qualified to write the lojban IUPAC rules and tha=
t hopefully some well respected&nbsp;career&nbsp;chemist happened to speak =
lojban and WOULD be qualified to write the lojban IUPAC rules. &nbsp;I was =
trying to be humble; of course now I am probably needlessly getting defensi=
ve over my 'geek' ego but so be it. &nbsp;I know you weren't trying to be d=
erogatory or anything so please don't take anything I say in a bad way. &nb=
sp;As far as speaking lojban, however, I AM in fact a complete 'noob'. &nbs=
p;(It is a good point you made though about how unlike Indo-European langua=
ges IUPAC nomenclature is)</div><div><br></div><div>Anyway...I digress, so =
lets continue. &nbsp;Because IUPAC names <i>are </i>language specific (desp=
ite the fact that the English is&nbsp;becoming&nbsp;more universally accept=
ed) it seems DOES seem malglico to just default to English IUPAC (malglico =
for the same reasons Robin listed in his essay here:&nbsp;<a href=3D"http:/=
/neptune.spaceports.com/~words/ial.html">http://neptune.spaceports.com/~wor=
ds/ial.html</a>&nbsp;that English shouldn't be an International&nbsp;Auxili=
ary&nbsp;Language).</div><div><br></div><div>As you said there isn't much r=
oom left in lojban for all the affixes (which I had suspected might be the =
case) used in IUPAC nomenclature. &nbsp;As mentioned earlier, I am a comple=
te lojban 'noob' so this might be a stupid question but is there some way t=
hat a cmavo or something could be used to denote "Hey we're talking about a=
 chemical nomenclature here!" and thus allow the 'grammar' rules within the=
&nbsp;limiters&nbsp;to be tweaked to be more IUPAC friendly while still kee=
ping the nomenclature 'lojbanic' in the sense that it is unique to lojban, =
uses lojban valsi and characters (in w/e orthography), and phonology? Would=
 not a similar system be viable for, say, a unique lojban taxonomy as well?=
 &nbsp;(Since it seems, as mentioned&nbsp;earlier, that some lojban speaker=
s [not me necessarily] appear to think biological taxonomy needs to be lojb=
anized as well.)&nbsp;</div><div><br></div><div>Wasn't there some sort of s=
ystem similar to this idea proposed for a Polish math system or w/e? (Not t=
hat I know what that is, Polish math I mean. &nbsp;I am guessing that it ha=
s to do with the fact that math terminology isn't actually universal, somet=
hing like the difference between British and a US billion, trillion, quadri=
llion, etc.?). &nbsp;Now I probably am sounding really stupid but you'll ju=
st have to forgive me for being the ignorant American here and not knowing =
what Polish math is.</div><div><br>On Wednesday, March 7, 2012 2:28:01 PM U=
TC-6, Pierre Abbat wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">All l=
anguages (except Latin itself, and maybe Greek from which many taxonomic <b=
r>roots come) treat biological taxonomic names the same way: they are marke=
d as <br>foreign (at least genus and species names) and (usually) undecline=
d. I know of <br>two exceptions, virus species names and some unranked taxa=
 of plants like <br>rosids, both of which are in English, at least in Engli=
sh. Common names, such <br>as English "geranium" and Lojban "plargoni", can=
 be derived from (or in <br>Romance languages, inherited from, such as Span=
ish "aves" and "avena") <br>scientific names, but may not have the same tax=
onomic extent. <p>Chemical nomenclature is a quite different beast. An IUPA=
C name of a <br>complicated organic chemical is very much like a long lujvo=
, and very unlike <br>the typical word formations of Indo-European and Semi=
tic languages, which <br>consist of a root, or a few roots joined together =
in IE, with a bunch of <br>prefixes, suffixes, and inflections stuck on. I =
think, therefore, that IUPAC <br>should be done with lujvo in Lojban. But t=
here isn't much room left for all <br>the affixes used in IUPAC. There are =
at least three ways numbers are used in <br>IUPAC: the oxidation state or v=
alence of an atom, the number of copies of a <br>group in a molecule, and t=
he atom to which a group is attached; and it's not <br>clear to me how to d=
istinguish them in Lojban. Take for instance 1,1,1-<br>trichloro-2,2-di(4-<=
wbr>chlorophenyl)ethane (aka DDT). The numerals denote which <br>atom the c=
hlorines and phenyls are attached to; the "di" and "tri" prefixes <br>mean =
there are three chlorines and two chlorophenyls attached to the ethane.</p>=
<p>Pierre<br>-- <br>Jews use a lunisolar calendar; Muslims use a solely lun=
ar calendar.<br></p><p></p></blockquote></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.<br />
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msg/lojban/-/eJiz4pD4NaAJ">https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/eJ=
iz4pD4NaAJ</a>.<br />=20
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.<br />


------=_Part_4938_16453817.1331160187553--