Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.237.203 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.94.237.203;
References: <5d22d3a4-46ca-4f77-bff4-5aa52f193e13@googlegroups.com> <CAHxnAmLkohAij3yhDYdLeAOxFzVzB_9KeRP68xuO3vXyS7josQ@mail.gmail.com> <b3250e2a-abb8-46d7-902e-64dbb58183a3@googlegroups.com> <CAHxnAmLnVviBrDPB8iWRyVMxgaKjC93GUF0rbfm8HAZWstjK_Q@mail.gmail.com> <e742f7f8-6fdd-4fa2-b245-40fd55091873@googlegroups.com> <1366476166.27815.YahooMailNeo@web184403.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <ecdba916-d75f-4b0a-a8c1-7d196392710f@googlegroups.com> <1366486391.26700.YahooMailNeo@web184406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51778037.3060405@lojban.org>
Message-ID: <1366823032.81863.YahooMailNeo@web184406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Should I quit learning Lojban?
To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" <lojban@googlegroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1789658926-1926407013-1366823032=:81863"
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

--1789658926-1926407013-1366823032=:81863
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My apologies.=A0 L4B was a long time ago and has not had much press (that I=
 remember or can find).=A0 I can't judge how effective it might be but it i=
s surely a step in the right direction (and goes some way toward making a c=
ouple of other points here).=A0 The best way to learn Lojban (or any langua=
ge) is still to read and write a lot of it (or speak=A0 it, if you can mana=
ge) and th text book does a bit of that, but a reader would be nice and a m=
ore carefully selected vocabulary (although this looks pretty good on a bri=
ef glance).
xorlo may be the only change approved, but hardly the only one in active us=
e.=A0 Further, xorlo is much more about interpretation and rather little ab=
out usage, so that almost nothing (after earlier tidying about quantifiers)=
 of older stuff has become incorrect (or new stuff correct).=A0 Most of the=
 other changes seems to have been in usage and, most dramatically/disastrou=
sly in vocabulary, but generally in precisely the esoteric discussions here=
, so not harming the useful language much.
Hopefully, the logic will be taught by example and not formulaically, espec=
ially since the examples are usually so far from thr formulae (the source o=
f both Lojban having some claim to be a language and the cause of the worry=
 about how logical it is).=A0=20
The historical roots of logical symbolism in Western culture and languages =
is too long to get into here (see Bochenski for some nice discussion) but t=
he essential "Europeanness" (not actually, but that idea get fixed with "SA=
E") goes far deeper.=A0 Whether speakers of European languages would have c=
ome up with Lojban without formal logic intervening is hard to judge; the p=
oint is, the Hopi wouldn't have, even with formal logic.


________________________________
 From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" <lojbab@lojban.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com=20
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 1:48 AM
Subject: Re: [lojban] Should I quit learning Lojban?
=20

John E Clifford wrote:
> Analogizing isn't encoding.=A0 Lojban is basically the language of logic,
> which, for all sorts of historical reasons, is SAE, that is, English, by
> and large.=A0 If you want something radically different, try Hopi or
> Menominee (Whorf's favorites).=A0 Still, Lojban's vocabulary is not an
> English relex (fairly obviously) nor is its basic grammar conceptually
> like English.=A0 It just is that the patterns of things turning up is mor=
e
> or less the same, {lo du'u} and "that" for example (which just turned up
> in something today, not perhaps a typical case).=A0 They are relatively
> easy to learn -- or would be if rationally taught (but a word list and a
> pumping technique combined with a reference grammar is not rational
> teaching).

...

> But if I'm just going to use Lojban as encoded English, what's the point
> of
 learning it?
>=20
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Unfortunately, there has not been until now a decent prime=
r -- or
>=A0 =A0  even a really bad one, so the process of learning what you really
>=A0 =A0  need and what is window dressing or advanced work has to be by tr=
ial
>=A0 =A0  and error.

I've seen sentiments like this before in the past few months, and it makes =
me wonder - doesn't anyone use Nick Nicolas's and Robin Turner's introducto=
ry textbook?=A0 And if so, what are its flaws that make one describe it as =
not "even a really bad one"?

Nick expanded Robin's original primer lessons because everyone said that th=
ey were so great to learn from, and the links to the book are on the same w=
eb page as the links to the reference grammar.


As for learning methodology, it depends on what aspect of the language you =
are trying to learn.

Vocabulary in any language is difficult.=A0
 Even languages with high cognate levels are still difficult - one can lear=
n Basic English rather trivially, since the vocabulary is essentially Engli=
sh words, but you have to learn which words are NOT in Basic English, and h=
ow to paraphrase around them.

Those with few cognates are but a little harder.=A0 You invent your own hoo=
ks; Nora's association of "manci" with a Wonder bread truck, making her thi=
nk of "munchies, since she likes to snack on bread, is the classic Lojban e=
xample.=A0 And the need for cognates largely stops at the gismu list (and p=
ossibly the cmavo, many of which have ties to specific gismu), since lujvo =
are analytically decomposable.

Learning vocabulary basically comes down to memorizing some minimum number =
of words dependent on your desired fluency level, whether by flashcards or =
some other technique.=A0 Greater fluency requires a larger vocabulary, thou=
gh in Lojban one can cheat a lot by learning to compose
 tanru and lujvo quickly on the fly.=A0 I used LogFlash (flashcards) to lea=
rn the Lojban lexicon, and it has stuck with me even though I rarely actual=
ly get around to using the language in non-trivial ways.

With Russian, I did little direct memorization, instead bothering to look u=
p every word I did not know, repeatedly if necessary, in a dictionary.=A0 A=
fter a half dozen times looking a word up, I usually have learned it to som=
e extent.=A0 The same is probably true for how I learned many of the cmavo =
in Lojban.


Place structures - well yes, it can be hard to learn the places of words wi=
th more than a couple of places.=A0 But then, everyone who has learned Engl=
ish verbs has learned what ambiguous prepositions mean when attached to tho=
se verbs.=A0 Not by memorizing them, but through usage.=A0 If a gismu (or o=
ther brivla) has more than 2 places, learn the first two, and that there ex=
ist additional places (which you
 will look up if and when they seem relevant).=A0 Then start using the word=
s.=A0 Again, the extra places that you use the most will be assimilated fai=
rly quickly by looking them up when needed.=A0 That many of the place struc=
tures have patterns common to a lot of words is a useful observation that a=
id in gaining those places.


Most of the logic of Lojban can be learned formulaically - "to say XXX, use=
 the pattern YYY".=A0 Once you learn the patterns, someone can explain the =
logical basis for those patterns if you really want to know.=A0 But surely,=
 Robin Powell is not going to need to teach his infants formal logic before=
 they will understand what he is saying, just like no one needs to explain =
what a direct object and a prepositional phrase are in order for you to und=
erstand English.=A0 You learn like a child does, and absorb the patterns, a=
nd then later go back to study the formalisms.

Covering the other of
 shanoxilt's expressed issues:

Much of the language debate on Lojban list, however esoteric, is not releva=
nt or essential to being able to understand and use the language.=A0 People=
 can debate the "correctness" of "who" vs "whom", of "fewer than" vs "less =
than", etc in English, and the discussions can get esoteric, but you will l=
ikely be understood even if you use them incorrectly.=A0 The best example o=
f this for me is xorlo, which I find so esoteric that almost any explanatio=
n washes over me like so many words and is forgotten 10 minutes later.=A0 B=
ut xorxes says that if I use Lojban the way I used it before xorlo was inve=
nted, I likely won't make any "errors", and I'll be understood, even if my =
style may seem a little antiquated because I use "le" sometimes when a xorl=
o aficionado might prefer "lo" (and I seem to have no more problem reading =
post-xorlo Lojban than earlier forms).

But for all the discussion of reforms, xorlo is
 the ONLY change that has been adopted by LLG in 15+ years.=A0 English usag=
e probably changes more rapidly than that, especially as people gravitate t=
o new media with radically different styles (such as those needed to fit yo=
ur thoughts into 140 character chunks).

I more or less agree with pc's (John Clifford's) comments about encoded Eng=
lish.=A0 Lojban sentences of more than a few words seldom could be thought =
of as encoded English.=A0 Look at the numerous literal translation examples=
 in the reference grammar.=A0 As to whether Western logic is fundamentally =
tied to European languages, I doubt that Loglan/Lojban would have been inve=
nted if normal speakers of European languages followed the rules of logic.=
=A0 And I will especially point out to pc the work we did many years ago on=
 negation in Lojban, which rather strongly deviates from English in several=
 ways (though one can mimic English usage stylistically with naku for sever=
al of
 its aspects).

lojbab
-- Bob LeChevalier=A0 =A0 lojbab@lojban.org=A0 =A0 www.lojban.org
President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group=
s "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


--1789658926-1926407013-1366823032=:81863
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><body><div style=3D"color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:ti=
mes new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div id=3D"yiv1505534=
306"><div><div style=3D"color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:times =
new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt;">My apologies.&nbsp; L4B =
was a long time ago and has not had much press (that I remember or can find=
).&nbsp; I can't judge how effective it might be but it is surely a step in=
 the right direction (and goes some way toward making a couple of other poi=
nts here).&nbsp; The best way to learn Lojban (or any language) is still to=
 read and write a lot of it (or speak&nbsp; it, if you can manage) and th t=
ext book does a bit of that, but a reader would be nice and a more carefull=
y selected vocabulary (although this looks pretty good on a brief glance).<=
br>xorlo may be the only change approved, but hardly the only one in active=
 use.&nbsp; Further, xorlo is much more about interpretation and rather
 little about usage, so that almost nothing (after earlier tidying about qu=
antifiers) of older stuff has become incorrect (or new stuff correct).&nbsp=
; Most of the other changes seems to have been in usage and, most dramatica=
lly/disastrously in vocabulary, but generally in precisely the esoteric dis=
cussions here, so not harming the useful language much.<br>Hopefully, the l=
ogic will be taught by example and not formulaically, especially since the =
examples are usually so far from thr formulae (the source of both Lojban ha=
ving some claim to be a language and the cause of the worry about how logic=
al it is).&nbsp; <br>The historical roots of logical symbolism in Western c=
ulture and languages is too long to get into here (see Bochenski for some n=
ice discussion) but the essential "Europeanness" (not actually, but that id=
ea get fixed with "SAE") goes far deeper.&nbsp; Whether speakers of Europea=
n languages would have come up with Lojban without formal logic
 intervening is hard to judge; the point is, the Hopi wouldn't have, even w=
ith formal logic.<br><div id=3D"yiv1505534306yui_3_7_2_18_1366820554792_54"=
><span><br></span></div><div><br id=3D"yiv1505534306yui_3_7_2_18_1366820554=
792_56"></div>  <div class=3D"yiv1505534306yui_3_7_2_18_1366820554792_58" i=
d=3D"yiv1505534306yui_3_7_2_18_1366820554792_59" style=3D"font-family:times=
 new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt;"> <div class=3D"yiv15055=
34306yui_3_7_2_18_1366820554792_62" style=3D"font-family:times new roman, n=
ew york, times, serif;font-size:12pt;"> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <hr size=3D"1">  =
<font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2"> <b><span style=3D"font-weight:bold;">From:=
</span></b> "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG"
 &lt;lojbab@lojban.org&gt;<br> <b><span style=3D"font-weight:bold;">To:</sp=
an></b> lojban@googlegroups.com <br> <b><span style=3D"font-weight:bold;">S=
ent:</span></b> Wednesday, April 24, 2013 1:48 AM<br> <b><span style=3D"fon=
t-weight:bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [lojban] Should I quit learning Loj=
ban?<br> </font> </div> <div class=3D"yiv1505534306y_msg_container"><br>
John E Clifford wrote:<br>&gt; Analogizing isn't encoding.&nbsp; Lojban is =
basically the language of logic,<br>&gt; which, for all sorts of historical=
 reasons, is SAE, that is, English, by<br>&gt; and large.&nbsp; If you want=
 something radically different, try Hopi or<br>&gt; Menominee (Whorf's favo=
rites).&nbsp; Still, Lojban's vocabulary is not an<br>&gt; English relex (f=
airly obviously) nor is its basic grammar conceptually<br>&gt; like English=
.&nbsp; It just is that the patterns of things turning up is more<br>&gt; o=
r less the same, {lo du'u} and "that" for example (which just turned up<br>=
&gt; in something today, not perhaps a typical case).&nbsp; They are relati=
vely<br>&gt; easy to learn -- or would be if rationally taught (but a word =
list and a<br>&gt; pumping technique combined with a reference grammar is n=
ot rational<br>&gt; teaching).<br><br>...<br><br>&gt; But if I'm just going=
 to use Lojban as encoded English, what's the point<br>&gt; of
 learning it?<br>&gt; <br>&gt;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Unfortunately, th=
ere has not been until now a decent primer -- or<br>&gt;&nbsp; &nbsp;  even=
 a really bad one, so the process of learning what you really<br>&gt;&nbsp;=
 &nbsp;  need and what is window dressing or advanced work has to be by tri=
al<br>&gt;&nbsp; &nbsp;  and error.<br><br>I've seen sentiments like this b=
efore in the past few months, and it makes me wonder - doesn't anyone use N=
ick Nicolas's and Robin Turner's introductory textbook?&nbsp; And if so, wh=
at are its flaws that make one describe it as not "even a really bad one"?<=
br><br>Nick expanded Robin's original primer lessons because everyone said =
that they were so great to learn from, and the links to the book are on the=
 same web page as the links to the reference grammar.<br><br><br><br>As for=
 learning methodology, it depends on what aspect of the language you are tr=
ying to learn.<br><br>Vocabulary in any language is difficult.&nbsp;
 Even languages with high cognate levels are still difficult - one can lear=
n Basic English rather trivially, since the vocabulary is essentially Engli=
sh words, but you have to learn which words are NOT in Basic English, and h=
ow to paraphrase around them.<br><br>Those with few cognates are but a litt=
le harder.&nbsp; You invent your own hooks; Nora's association of "manci" w=
ith a Wonder bread truck, making her think of "munchies, since she likes to=
 snack on bread, is the classic Lojban example.&nbsp; And the need for cogn=
ates largely stops at the gismu list (and possibly the cmavo, many of which=
 have ties to specific gismu), since lujvo are analytically decomposable.<b=
r><br>Learning vocabulary basically comes down to memorizing some minimum n=
umber of words dependent on your desired fluency level, whether by flashcar=
ds or some other technique.&nbsp; Greater fluency requires a larger vocabul=
ary, though in Lojban one can cheat a lot by learning to compose
 tanru and lujvo quickly on the fly.&nbsp; I used LogFlash (flashcards) to =
learn the Lojban lexicon, and it has stuck with me even though I rarely act=
ually get around to using the language in non-trivial ways.<br><br>With Rus=
sian, I did little direct memorization, instead bothering to look up every =
word I did not know, repeatedly if necessary, in a dictionary.&nbsp; After =
a half dozen times looking a word up, I usually have learned it to some ext=
ent.&nbsp; The same is probably true for how I learned many of the cmavo in=
 Lojban.<br><br><br><br>Place structures - well yes, it can be hard to lear=
n the places of words with more than a couple of places.&nbsp; But then, ev=
eryone who has learned English verbs has learned what ambiguous preposition=
s mean when attached to those verbs.&nbsp; Not by memorizing them, but thro=
ugh usage.&nbsp; If a gismu (or other brivla) has more than 2 places, learn=
 the first two, and that there exist additional places (which you
 will look up if and when they seem relevant).&nbsp; Then start using the w=
ords.&nbsp; Again, the extra places that you use the most will be assimilat=
ed fairly quickly by looking them up when needed.&nbsp; That many of the pl=
ace structures have patterns common to a lot of words is a useful observati=
on that aid in gaining those places.<br><br><br>Most of the logic of Lojban=
 can be learned formulaically - "to say XXX, use the pattern YYY".&nbsp; On=
ce you learn the patterns, someone can explain the logical basis for those =
patterns if you really want to know.&nbsp; But surely, Robin Powell is not =
going to need to teach his infants formal logic before they will understand=
 what he is saying, just like no one needs to explain what a direct object =
and a prepositional phrase are in order for you to understand English.&nbsp=
; You learn like a child does, and absorb the patterns, and then later go b=
ack to study the formalisms.<br><br>Covering the other of
 shanoxilt's expressed issues:<br><br>Much of the language debate on Lojban=
 list, however esoteric, is not relevant or essential to being able to unde=
rstand and use the language.&nbsp; People can debate the "correctness" of "=
who" vs "whom", of "fewer than" vs "less than", etc in English, and the dis=
cussions can get esoteric, but you will likely be understood even if you us=
e them incorrectly.&nbsp; The best example of this for me is xorlo, which I=
 find so esoteric that almost any explanation washes over me like so many w=
ords and is forgotten 10 minutes later.&nbsp; But xorxes says that if I use=
 Lojban the way I used it before xorlo was invented, I likely won't make an=
y "errors", and I'll be understood, even if my style may seem a little anti=
quated because I use "le" sometimes when a xorlo aficionado might prefer "l=
o" (and I seem to have no more problem reading post-xorlo Lojban than earli=
er forms).<br><br>But for all the discussion of reforms, xorlo is
 the ONLY change that has been adopted by LLG in 15+ years.&nbsp; English u=
sage probably changes more rapidly than that, especially as people gravitat=
e to new media with radically different styles (such as those needed to fit=
 your thoughts into 140 character chunks).<br><br>I more or less agree with=
 pc's (John Clifford's) comments about encoded English.&nbsp; Lojban senten=
ces of more than a few words seldom could be thought of as encoded English.=
&nbsp; Look at the numerous literal translation examples in the reference g=
rammar.&nbsp; As to whether Western logic is fundamentally tied to European=
 languages, I doubt that Loglan/Lojban would have been invented if normal s=
peakers of European languages followed the rules of logic.&nbsp; And I will=
 especially point out to pc the work we did many years ago on negation in L=
ojban, which rather strongly deviates from English in several ways (though =
one can mimic English usage stylistically with naku for several of
 its aspects).<br><br>lojbab<br>-- Bob LeChevalier&nbsp; &nbsp; <a rel=3D"n=
ofollow" ymailto=3D"mailto:lojbab@lojban.org" target=3D"_blank" href=3D"mai=
lto:lojbab@lojban.org">lojbab@lojban.org</a>&nbsp; &nbsp; www.lojban.org<br=
>President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.<br><br>-- You rece=
ived this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" =
group.<br>To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,=
 send an email to lojban+<a rel=3D"nofollow" ymailto=3D"mailto:unsubscribe@=
googlegroups.com" target=3D"_blank" href=3D"mailto:unsubscribe@googlegroups=
.com">unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>To post to this group, send emai=
l to <a rel=3D"nofollow" ymailto=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com" target=
=3D"_blank" href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com">lojban@googlegroups.com=
</a>.<br>Visit this group at <a rel=3D"nofollow" target=3D"_blank"
 href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den">http://groups.googl=
e.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den</a>.<br>For more options, visit <a rel=3D"nofoll=
ow" target=3D"_blank" href=3D"https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out">htt=
ps://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br><br><br><br><br></div> </div>=
 </div>  </div></div></div></div></body></html>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3De=
n">http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out=
">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

--1789658926-1926407013-1366823032=:81863--