Received: from mail-vb0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]:61605) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1T6hJX-0003mU-9k; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:24:17 -0700 Received: by vbzb23 with SMTP id b23sf513958vbz.16 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:24:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :message-id:references:to:x-mailer: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=H3ryeI9DsZPzYPjusjQf0RiwgBUvy2YsF6EU5Jw7H38=; b=PXF0cGyVk0BydhkJSMZC181Mm6aH1vCYA5TRdp4Hhg9lCzC37RacOV2CGkiYQJn9w6 lVRSFQbRO6dhOP90OoK453ubqgQO6F/AR3PG2os8MzV1xXHJCrCw3RtTe06PYzU9i1Qb /tdCk6E0CNLwb41faAfF8tgmoKZvycNcsIh0j88KV1YUSQcwE4lxKHmIqgRhs/SmNGRs i4Tlvt3e31mvpTZRC5XMsFnRGQWpeudPXS8NtxG4XC5L+Rk6074OFFV+fs29BJ0dly// ZxgnD3+B3AidJSazyR7RmOjSeRdpbtvIUTcYpL9cRy+ju3lpgBUw0OHTUIsRKJ4oWXcY WL8Q== Received: by 10.50.13.230 with SMTP id k6mr300135igc.0.1346243040135; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:24:00 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.104.169 with SMTP id gf9ls2516241igb.0.gmail; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:23:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.157.130 with SMTP id wm2mr683720igb.4.1346243039434; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:23:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.157.130 with SMTP id wm2mr683718igb.4.1346243039395; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:23:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f176.google.com (mail-iy0-f176.google.com [209.85.210.176]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ad4si2431430igc.1.2012.08.29.05.23.59 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:23:59 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of michael.everson@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.176 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.176; Received: by iagt4 with SMTP id t4so1189252iag.21 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:23:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.179.99 with SMTP id df3mr1308964igc.73.1346243039271; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:23:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.59.24.31] ([205.201.170.136]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q1sm15255917igj.15.2012.08.29.05.23.57 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:23:58 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Subject: Re: [lojban] la .alis. From: Michael Everson In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 05:23:55 -0700 Message-Id: <3D464C95-60FC-4A6C-9C36-6D084355D3C3@gmail.com> References: <2320FCB7-86FE-4E30-9F24-DAD6E40024D7@evertype.com> <925d17561003280714y30d5eb1fo19b9f97eb6902eaa@mail.gmail.com> <4BAF7446.6070008@gmail.com> <20100328192909.GG6600@digitalkingdom.org> <925d17561003281729t30ffbfcbge6209c18f8d01d36@mail.gmail.com> <06B70573-D388-4FA0-8F64-9BB9FFAFB2EC@gmail.com> <7F59D3D5-5098-46A0-836C-951115845E84@gmail.com>

To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Original-Sender: michael.everson@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of michael.everson@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.176 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=michael.everson@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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / On 26 Aug 2012, at 13:40, Jonathan Jones wrote: >>>> The way you have it, with lu=C2=AB and li'u=C2=BB, would imply that Da= ddy-as-narrator says "lu" but that Daddy-as-Alice will say "li'u". >>>=20 >>> No, because the "=C2=BB" is not the ending quotation mark. The "li'u" i= s. >>>=20 >> No, because "li'u" is a quotation-ending word, not quotation-ending punc= tuation. Punctuation and capitalization is merely decorative: the words of = the text as spoken should be the same as the words of the text as written, = and any use of punctuation and capitalization may be made for clarity can e= asily be stripped out and the underlying text would be the same. >=20 > The fact that {li'u} is a word, not a symbol, does not make it any less a= mark. It marks the end of the quote. It is, therefore, a mark. Sorry, no. You're employing semantic legerdemain here, based on the polysem= y of "mark".=20 Many languages use particles to indicate various states of discourse. Irish= and Chinese and Esperanto have words that are used when a word is a questi= on. In English, we often state out loud "quote" and "unquote" when we are *= speaking* and citing someone else. That habit probably arose out of literac= y, but nevertheless, English has (optional) particles "quote" and "unquote"= and Lojban has obligatory particles "liu" and "li'u" (and "nio", and "to" = and "toi" and others). Those particles exist in speech. Writing has nothing= to do with it. The only language that can't exist without writing is Bliss= ymbols, as it has no phonology. > As to the rest of your comment- you are now arguing my side for me. I shouldn't think so. > If the purely decorative punctuation has no effect on the text, then obvi= ously- from the text's viewpoint, and therefore the reader's as well- which= side the =C2=AB and =C2=BB has no effect on when the falsetto speaking beg= ins and ends. However, I know of no language- written in Latin orthography = or otherwise- in which punctuation is purely decorative /except/ in cases w= here the language has /words/ as punctuation, as Lojban does, and in these = cases the "purely decorative" symbols are rarely if ever used. all punctuation is decorative because the language exists without it there = isnt necessarily any requirement that punctuation be used and in fact most = languages historically have started their lives without much punctuation so= me languages like latin and greek didnt even put spaces between words now o= f course we find it very convenient to decorate our texts with punctuation = and capital letters and those sorts of things it is easier to navigate a te= xt when these little quote decorative unquote marks are use dont you agree = if you dont why dont you it seems quite obvious and it is certainly the cas= e that historically writing preceded punctuation and punctuation developed = from simple like the space or the dot to complex like the inverted interrob= ang What I was trying to say about "purely decorative" is that in principle cap= italization and non-alphabetic punctuation marks could be added or removed = from a text in Lojban without affecting the actual text as it might be read= or said aloud.=20 That is why would disagree with *replacing* "lu" by "=C2=AB" or "li'u" by "= =C2=BB": if you later stripped out the punctuation the text would not be th= e same. >>> And in this respect, All foreign symbols, such as !?"=C2=AB=C2=BB#$ etc= ., are entirely redundant and only serve to help non-proficient readers. >>=20 >> They are redundant, yes, and may "serve to help non-proficient readers" = but that is not their only function. Punctuation and capitalization are the= rule and not the exception for languages which write using the Latin scrip= t. Since most everyone who comes to Lojban comes to it from one of those la= nguages, it makes little sense for Lojban to jettison typographic richness = for an aesthetic of sparseness. (That's my opinion anyway.) >=20 > Lojban didn't jettison for aesthetic reasons. It did so specifically to a= ttempt to maximize, as you say, "the words of the text as spoken should be = the same as the words of the text as written". By making the punctuation be= words, the level of similarity between spoken Lojban and written Lojban is= nearly one to one., and much, much higher than languages in any script tha= t use punctuation symbols. I don't agree. Lojban was designed so that certain functional categories, l= ike "citation" and "parenthesis", had particles reflecting those categories= , including beginning and ending particles. That isn't the same thing as sa= ying that "it made the punctuation be words", which I think is a simplistic= reduction of the actual intent. These particles (which are words, not "pun= ctuation" which are graphs) do make Lojban more precise than many other lan= guages, in this regard anyway. > In this respect it is more like your Chinese example, as the symbols are = /always/ adjacent to the Lojban word they represent. They are "always" there only when people choose to put them there. Esperant= o's question particle "=C4=89u" comes at the beginning of a sentences just = as the Lojban "xu" often does, yet the question mark is placed at the end o= f the sentence in Esperanto without any loss of meaning or confusion. Michael --=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.