Received: from mail-gg0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]:49593)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCKOXn8wTENT4qP0EGgR61EZT@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1SS3R5-00080E-4r; Wed, 09 May 2012 02:44:05 -0700
Received: by ggke5 with SMTP id e5sf63586ggk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 09 May 2012 02:43:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:mime-version:date:in-reply-to:references:user-agent
         :x-http-useragent:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender
         :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list
         :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=NPe9ptkiLPy6tSZ5U2lt65MFNM6ns7gbjZzoIBD0Y4g=;
        b=S8YhnrJ2UbK1XRnYuiZUd58IxTOW55qwLaCEgRpaqAfAFWUyknY0AcdNSdyr8RbrfZ
         wdaLQ7kqOhjG7QP0M9USahoFhoL77VMhIhNcrU/0RID1hjuJTCYFADOoiSV0ypkX3eBx
         CX33raJ/Ot6ozqC8v14T/eZB5RLQVqZdEqtV0=
Received: by 10.52.76.198 with SMTP id m6mr848972vdw.12.1336556628397;
        Wed, 09 May 2012 02:43:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.52.89.36 with SMTP id bl4ls1037675vdb.8.gmail; Wed, 09 May
 2012 02:43:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.34.8 with SMTP id v8mr571667vdi.5.1336556627904; Wed, 09
 May 2012 02:43:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ee2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com with HTTP; Wed, 9 May 2012 02:43:47
 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 02:43:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ8VDXh0YfSr8WngwzKZW89Czaf550uh=vOrgSCZ-7sG8gwwA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3713959.1175.1335276119163.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjb15>
 <CAMKwHj1mm5JgBAFKKw0OKr6_jh59PUwzv3ED6St3N3FvWwEFxA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+gZtg+Pd7u+D-MBWSTi9O7B+sJ1GF2Wgc-t4ij6S5X=QF6gdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <22535506.2534.1335343311953.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjj38>
 <CAMKwHj1Y=XhahPUzaVMOS+2Uw9uh7VNZ1qay08_UnDm1KMJcHA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMKwHj05wX6X1Jwb75864tVKgT0b3_5yf-wyHWB-YA+BoX9EUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMKwHj3mvDY493k0Gk73NRkV-oOmgXCXt+CH7v_-hQKTY0-1sw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOQ8VDUc7O=z5SrBFYQCLMiqp4GfrYfcgPC8+pxBdie8o7p3dg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMKwHj1d=j5kn3sabyxO_JbOfszwsyXDvQTxm8mFq9G8MyQB_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMKwHj0UVnAHWhS8M516WcMKMitfdZn-kAG6CFw170OYRO6bUw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOQ8VDXh0YfSr8WngwzKZW89Czaf550uh=vOrgSCZ-7sG8gwwA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2) AppleWebKit/536.11 (KHTML, like
 Gecko) Chrome/20.0.1130.1 Safari/536.11,gzip(gfe)
Message-ID: <4484c406-5d9c-4490-bdd5-ac5c39bd6d3a@ee2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
Subject: [lojban] Re: Rafybri and 4 new rafsi. Suggestion for a new
 agglutinative style in Lojban
From: gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban <lojban@googlegroups.com>
X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: ls.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain
 of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates internal as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /



On Apr 26, 2:47=A0am, Jacob Errington <nicty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm pretty sure that the zo'u-construct I used at the beginning will pars=
e,
> notwithstanding that I'm almost certain that I've seen it used before, by
> skilled lojbanists. However, you're right about the second one, that [cu]
> was from my initial idea of the sentence; removing it makes the sentence
> parse, and maintain the intended meaning.
> Nothing in there is used purely for the sake of complexity: it's just the
> way I write in Lojban.
i seki'u e'o do ba ze'e pilno lo do cusku tadji vau i'o
> The most complicated thing there is stuff like
> [CONNECTIVE BAI BO] and jai, but neither of those are really that
> complicated. Oh, and ad hoc lujvo that are 100% non-cilmo, like [kamseljm=
i]
> -> [ka se jimpe]. I do that for shortening, and to remember rafsi.
>
> mu'o mi'e la tsani
>
> On 25 April 2012 07:11, Jonathan Jones <eyeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Also, it seems to me- and granted I haven't seen much of your writing, =
so
> > I could be wrong- that you're purposefully using very advanced grammati=
cal
> > constructs. I would suggest trimming the fat, as it were, considering I=
'm
> > pretty sure gleki is still a nintadni. I consider myself a middle-level
> > jbopre and I had trouble understanding you.
>
> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 5:01 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeo...@gmail.com> wro=
te:
>
> >> doi tsani do na drani pe'i loka pilno zo zo'u
>
> >> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Jacob Errington <nicty...@gmail.com>w=
rote:
>
> >>> i doi la gleki zo'u tu'e
> >>> i je'a se nandu lo nu jai galfi lo jbobau i mi tugni la djanatyn djon=
s
> >>> lo du'u su'o lo jbopre goi ko'a troci gi'eku'i iesa'e fliba
> >>> i la deple'u mlana .e la xorlo cu po'o =A0zo'u snada gi'eki'ubo je'a =
ke
> >>> jbobau sarcu
> >>> i ta'onai tu'a zo co .eja'ebo zoi raf col raf se smuni lo do seldji v=
au
> >>> pe'i
> >>> i sa'e lu mi joi lo pampe'o cu simxu co kansa co zgana co nu tigni co
> >>> pendo li'u mupli tu'a zo co
> >>> i si'a zo simcolkancolzgacolnuntigycolpe'o mupli ra'oi col
> >>> i ku'i lo lujvo pe zo col so'aroi clani dukse vau iepei
> >>> i lo lujvo pe secau tu'a cy. zi'e noi ke'a se mupli zo
> >>> nunpedytigkezyzgakansi'u noi ke'a lujvo fo lo bi'unai clani tanru cu =
je'a
> >>> zanmau
> >>> i ja'o lo tai lujvo cu jai frili fai lo kamseljmi ki'u lo du'u so'ero=
iku
> >>> lo seltau cu srana lo za'umoi sumti tu'u
>
> >>> mu'o mi'e la tsani
>
> >>> On 25 April 2012 06:27, Jonathan Jones <eyeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> doi gleki do na pamoi troci lonu xagzengau lo jbobau
> >>>> to lu ko'a gasnu lonu ko'e zenba loka xamgu ko'i kei ko'o li'u smuni=
 toi
> >>>> .i so'a jbopre ti'u lo nintadni to mi cmima toi cu troci lo se go'i
> >>>> .i da'aso'ada na snada
> >>>> .i ro go'i cu te cusku lu ko pamoi nitcu lonu cilre lo jbobau gi'e
> >>>> remoi nitcu lonu jimpe
> >>>> .i ca lonu la'edi'u mulno ku curmi lonu troci li'u
> >>>> .i puti'u lonu nanca li pamu ku la xorlo .e la.dotsaid. se steci lon=
u
> >>>> snada
>
> >>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeo...@gmail.com>w=
rote:
>
> >>>>> Thinking about it, the whole "counter-intuitive" thing is actually =
a
> >>>>> really good reason against placing cnita1 in klama3 for nitkla. Mak=
ing
> >>>>> klama3, the origin, be cnita1, the thing below, logically means pla=
cing
> >>>>> cnita2, the thing above, in klama3, the destination, making nitkla =
in case
> >>>>> mean, in essence "to go upwards". The reason this is counter-intuit=
ive is
> >>>>> because it means using a word that means "down"- or at least a mean=
ing
> >>>>> associated, "under, below, etc."- to make a word that means "up". W=
e have a
> >>>>> word that means "up" in exactly the same way cnita means "down"- ga=
pru- so
> >>>>> it would make more sense to use that for a "go up" lujvo. {lu ko'a =
gapru
> >>>>> ko'e li'u mintu soi lu ko'a se cnita ko'e li'u}
>
> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeo...@gmail.com>=
wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Personally, I think you're overestimating the difficulty. Most luj=
vo
> >>>>>> can be easily figured out without needing to "memorize" them, as l=
ong as
> >>>>>> you /have/ memorized the gismu, cmavo, and their rafsi, which you =
/have to
> >>>>>> do anyway/ to speak Lojban fluently.
>
> >>>>>> I don't see how it is difficult to figure out, without previously
> >>>>>> learning the definition, that nitkla means "x1 goes down from high=
 point x2
> >>>>>> to low point x3 ...". I can see how variants could be what you con=
clude, as
> >>>>>> Latro showed, but you should at least be able to understand that
> >>>>>> "downwards" and "move" constitute the meaning of "nitkla", merely =
by
> >>>>>> knowing the meanings of cnita and klama, and also knowing the rafs=
i thereof.
>
> >>>>>> Also, there's this really great strategy for finding out what a wo=
rd
> >>>>>> you don't know means. It's actually an ancient technique, used sin=
ce the
> >>>>>> first days of verbal communication: Ask the person that said it.
>
> >>>>>> Lojban is a young language, with no native speakers (although Robi=
n's
> >>>>>> trying to change the latter), so it's no surprise that most people=
 have
> >>>>>> difficulties regarding concepts.
>
> >>>>>> The only time I have trouble with a Lojban word, however, is when =
the
> >>>>>> meaning is counter-intuitive, that is, when what it means does not=
 seem to
> >>>>>> fit in with what is used to make it, such as me'ispe. Looking at t=
he word,
> >>>>>> without knowing the definition, you would think it has something t=
o do with
> >>>>>> the concepts of "marriage" and "sister", and you may even reach th=
e
> >>>>>> conclusion that it's talking about someone who is a sister because=
 of a
> >>>>>> marriage. This makes sense.
>
> >>>>>> me'ispe currently means "Brother-in-Law".
>
> >>>>>> My line of attack for lujvo like the above isn't to try to memoriz=
e
> >>>>>> the meaning, or to come with some addition to the language that wi=
ll make
> >>>>>> it more complicated while seeming to make it more simple (any addi=
tion is
> >>>>>> automatically an increase in complexity), but to /fix/ the /broken=
/ word.
>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 2:41 AM, gleki <gleki.is.my.n...@gmail.com=
>wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> My suggestion for rafybri is to eliminate the need to memorise
> >>>>>>> thousands of words which makes Lojban dictionary as hard to memor=
ise as
> >>>>>>> native languages.
> >>>>>>> If you can say {klama lo cnita} instead of {nitkla} it's ok. If y=
ou
> >>>>>>> feel {klama lo cnita} =A0is too long to pronounce you might wanna=
 use rafybri.
>
> >>>>>>> The meaning =A0of lujvo is postulated. They need to be entered in=
to
> >>>>>>> dictionaries to be clearly understood by everyone.
> >>>>>>> The meaning of rafybri is not postulated. You don't have to add t=
hem
> >>>>>>> to dictionaries.
> >>>>>>> Everyone can easily decompress them back to bridi. You don't have=
 to
> >>>>>>> memorise thousands of words.
> >>>>>>> In some cases, though, lujvo is the best solution (take names of
> >>>>>>> plants and animals, for instance). But "to descend" is really not=
 worth it.
>
> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 8:05:35 AM UTC+4, Latro wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> That's a bias in favor of klama2, which is malgli if it is
> >>>>>>>> considered to be inherent (it isn't malgli in an actual lujvo de=
finition).
> >>>>>>>> It could just as easily be "below type-of-going" i.e. "going fro=
m below"
> >>>>>>>> i.e. "rising". This seems less obvious to an English speaker but=
 that's
> >>>>>>>> only because of preposition omission; "going below" is "going to=
 below"
> >>>>>>>> which is essentially symmetric with the case which favors klama3=
. There is
> >>>>>>>> a similar albeit less natural version for klama4, namely essenti=
ally
> >>>>>>>> "tunneling", in the physical sense.
>
> >>>>>>>> On the general topic, I think making a substantive agglutinative
> >>>>>>>> system is probably going to wind up being futile in a language l=
ike this.
>
> >>>>>>>> mu'o mi'e latros
>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeo...@gmail.c=
om>wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:01 AM, gleki <gleki.is.my.n...@gmail.=
com
> >>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>> At first I must say that I'm not a member of any
> >>>>>>>>>> language-developing committee (BPFK or anything).
> >>>>>>>>>> And the following is just an idea how the flexibility of Lojba=
n
> >>>>>>>>>> can be enriched.
> >>>>>>>>>> Nobody is asked to use the following when writing or speaking
> >>>>>>>>>> real Lojban.
> >>>>>>>>>> Everything here should be marked as exclusively experimental a=
nd
> >>>>>>>>>> (.a'o) as the source for further consideration.
> >>>>>>>>>> None of the existing rules of Lojban (the baseline) is changed=
.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> *Rafybri*
> >>>>>>>>>> *
> >>>>>>>>>> *
> >>>>>>>>>> I always noticed how lujvo break the transparent logic of brid=
i.
> >>>>>>>>>> Let's look at {nitkla} which means {klama lo cnita}.
> >>>>>>>>>> Although it's much easier to learn {nitkla} rather then "desce=
nd"
> >>>>>>>>>> (in English they differ in sounding considerably)
> >>>>>>>>>> nobody can guess that {nitkla} means "descend" and doesn't mea=
n
> >>>>>>>>>> "go in a lower position under something" without getting the t=
ranslation
> >>>>>>>>>> beforehand.
>
> >>>>>>>>> I disagree. I argue that it is actually rather easy to determin=
e
> >>>>>>>>> the meaning of nitkla.
>
> >>>>>>>>> Let us assume that nitkla is a lujvo formed from the tanru {cni=
ta
> >>>>>>>>> klama}, which may or may not be true. {cnita klama} is a "below=
 type-of
> >>>>>>>>> going", i.e.. "going below", i.e. "descending".
>
> >>>>>>>>> How is that difficult to figure out?
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Although anybody is free to say "klama lo cnita" instead
> >>>>>>>>>> it will lead to lengthier speech.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> What I suggest is to glue bridi together into a new form of lu=
jvo
> >>>>>>>>>> called "rafybri".
> >>>>>>>>>> That's how it works.
> >>>>>>>>>> 1. First rule
>
> >>>>>>>>>> 4 new rafsi
> >>>>>>>>>> zve <=3D be fe lo
> >>>>>>>>>> zvi <=3D be fi lo
> >>>>>>>>>> zvo <=3D be fo lo
> >>>>>>>>>> zvu <=3D be fu
>
> ...
>
> read more =BB

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.