Received: from mail-qa0-f56.google.com ([209.85.216.56]:55456)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCKOXn8wTELiPhv8EGgS8eC3e@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1ShG99-0008Hm-EO; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:20:20 -0700
Received: by qauh8 with SMTP id h8sf244734qau.1
        for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject
         :mime-version: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;
        bh=xNNtcuSe6WcrfK4rIVScPH0H4gRpqsp89JaZ7qgkm60=;
        b=A2nXICLnW5g0oOLW0igqBHxa3AaKq4CBRh3IVkA+xcwprG+FsB2d2JzglUzb4qCs6m
         1P4h5E4ovQosp6uxnyu2Pu33gzYmi6dvOEzTCi2IJ6i3CSj4eQ5FNDdPfKuYcFjfWy5x
         mmL8o3/3HI53Bakzl+ea5A4IJePknpcg6nh70=
Received: by 10.68.233.166 with SMTP id tx6mr253829pbc.12.1340180408861;
        Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:20:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.129.226 with SMTP id nz2ls7970325pbb.5.gmail; Wed, 20 Jun
 2012 01:20:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.232.230 with SMTP id tr6mr2717351pbc.16.1340180407346;
        Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:20:07 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:20:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <a85482a8-660d-4379-9e21-461cc6d88f5c@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGO2uONMoF1BfuR+wJNn7y9ecjKg8PTeNHOp8J03JGAwmp5bnQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGO2uOPcMjNogyRO8Wi-v+swm60xLR8X21=aykzmcMOh51e0-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <eddd7913-ac3b-4ec2-a72b-9f199852776b@googlegroups.com>
 <CAGO2uONMoF1BfuR+wJNn7y9ecjKg8PTeNHOp8J03JGAwmp5bnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Are Natlang the best case for entropy in
 communication ?
MIME-Version: 1.0
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: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_786_11762050.1340180406108"
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_786_11762050.1340180406108
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1



On Tuesday, June 19, 2012 2:58:52 PM UTC+4, Escape Landsome wrote:
>
> > I believe that most Chinese words sound the same for an ordinary English 
> > speaker because the latter is just not used to it's phonology. 
> > But still Chinese is the language with which you can send people to 
> outer 
> > space. Does it mean that this language is bad? 
>
>
> No, you miss the point. 
>
> The problem is not with pronounciation in itself but with *phonemes*. 
>
> Phonemes are defined as smallest units of phonological type that carry 
> meaning in a double segmentation scheme. 
>
> That is, /b/ and /p/ are english phonemes, not because they're not the 
> same sounds, but because there is a pair of words such as "bit" / 
> "pit", and thus it is wise to consider an opposition between them. 
>
> But in other languages, such as chinese, b and p are not distinct 
> phonemes. 
>
> Which is no probleme, because Chinese has other meaningful opposition 
> pairs, such as "plosive" vs "mute", or "nasalized" versus "no-nasal" 
>
> . 
>
> And thus, /a/, /e/, /i/, /o/ /u/ are phonemes in lojban in the 
> contradistinction set of so'V 
>
> But different words with opposite meanings IN THE SAME PARADIGME 
> differ form only one phoneme, which is not wise 
>

Who is right? The one who says that words must be easy to  memorise?
Or the one who says that there should be some entropy?
No language can be convenient for everyone.


> --- 
>
> (Also, "a lot", "few", "all" and "none" do not differ only from one 
> feature in Chinese...  but from a lot a differente phonological 
> feature.  We don't care if "all" and "horse" are very near.  But we 
> care this be the case for "all" and "none" !!!) 
>

-- 
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/-/kQuKdzcp4yEJ.
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_786_11762050.1340180406108
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br>On Tuesday, June 19, 2012 2:58:52 PM UTC+4, Escape Landsome wrote:<=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;bord=
er-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">&gt; I believe that most Chines=
e words sound the same for an ordinary English
<br>&gt; speaker because the latter is just not used to it's phonology.
<br>&gt; But still Chinese is the language with which you can send people t=
o outer
<br>&gt; space. Does it mean that this language is bad?
<br>
<br>
<br>No, you miss the point.
<br>
<br>The problem is not with pronounciation in itself but with *phonemes*.
<br>
<br>Phonemes are defined as smallest units of phonological type that carry
<br>meaning in a double segmentation scheme.
<br>
<br>That is, /b/ and /p/ are english phonemes, not because they're not the
<br>same sounds, but because there is a pair of words such as "bit" /
<br>"pit", and thus it is wise to consider an opposition between them.
<br>
<br>But in other languages, such as chinese, b and p are not distinct phone=
mes.
<br>
<br>Which is no probleme, because Chinese has other meaningful opposition
<br>pairs, such as "plosive" vs "mute", or "nasalized" versus "no-nasal"
<br>
<br>.
<br>
<br>And thus, /a/, /e/, /i/, /o/ /u/ are phonemes in lojban in the
<br>contradistinction set of so'V
<br>
<br>But different words with opposite meanings IN THE SAME PARADIGME
<br>differ form only one phoneme, which is not wise
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Who is right? The one who says that wo=
rds must be easy to &nbsp;memorise?</div><div>Or the one who says that ther=
e should be some entropy?</div><div>No language can be convenient for every=
one.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>---
<br>
<br>(Also, "a lot", "few", "all" and "none" do not differ only from one
<br>feature in Chinese... &nbsp;but from a lot a differente phonological
<br>feature. &nbsp;We don't care if "all" and "horse" are very near. &nbsp;=
But we
<br>care this be the case for "all" and "none" !!!)
<br></blockquote>

<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/-/kQuKdzcp4yEJ">https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/kQ=
uKdzcp4yEJ</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_786_11762050.1340180406108--