Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.237.218 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.94.237.218;
References: <5d22d3a4-46ca-4f77-bff4-5aa52f193e13@googlegroups.com> <1367077174.81679.YahooMailNeo@web184406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <64004f6e-1230-4ea5-9e50-d47c4f125465@googlegroups.com> <2522542.hS9FGoL6dn@caracal> <f20e55e7-1bfc-4836-9f77-3ce08e5287d0@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <1367185250.6160.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 14:40:50 -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>
In-Reply-To: <f20e55e7-1bfc-4836-9f77-3ce08e5287d0@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="1009959307-433294583-1367185250=:6160"
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

--1009959307-433294583-1367185250=:6160
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This is all getting very confusing to me; I either don't get the point of v=
arious comments or I don't see the relevance of them to what I think is the=
 topic at hand (which long ago ceased to be about learning Lojban -- we oug=
ht to change the title).=A0 Let try to sort some things out for my own bene=
fit.
SAEss is a late derivative (and probably the result of a misunderstanding) =
of SAEsl, a term Whorf apparently coined.=A0 It happens that all of the ss =
languages are also sl, which reenforces the confusion.
The fact that Lojban has adjectives and verbs and common nouns -- or doesn'=
t -- is largely irrelevant to the question whether it is a SAE ("thing"), p=
roperty, process or sensation language.=A0 It can (more or less by design) =
reproduce the effects of all sorts of languages, but to do so, it must conv=
ert properties or processes or sensations into things.=A0 Well, not convert=
 actually, since they already are in Lojban -- a property is a set of thing=
s (and sets are things, too) or a function (another thing) from worlds (thi=
ngs) to such sets.=A0 I assume that the converse would happen in a process =
or property=A0 or sensation language, with things represented by properties=
 or processes or sensations, as the case might be.=A0=20

Nor does the fact that an NP can refer to several things matter or even tha=
t it does in a particular situation (xorlo -- in one of its later and more =
solid forms=A0 -- to the rescue. =A0 Note that {le broda} refers to just wh=
at it does and the existence of other things like that are irrelevant, unli=
ke {lo broda}in some circumstances).=A0 (the bit about {zo'e} is one of the=
 stranger myths, since {zo'e} is merely a contradictory word without a real=
 use -- a weak foundation for anything -- while {lo}, for example, is quite=
 precise and clear).
I don't get the Sumerian story (I would have assumed it was announcing a ne=
w king, for one thing).=A0 The translation into English is, inevitably thin=
g-language; don't know what the original was like but I don't see anything =
particularly property languageish here.
Is the unclarity just a confusion between verbs and processes, adjectives a=
nd properties, nouns and things?=A0 It seems so, though I don't believe any=
 of us actually has such confusions (though I have to admit that Whorf migh=
t).=20

But we do talk as though we had this.=A0 I suspect (without great confidenc=
e, admittedly) that property / process /sensation grammars start S =3D> NP =
+ VP.=A0 The difference is somewhere else and I don't know where it is, exa=
ctly.


________________________________
 From: la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com=20
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2013 5:16 AM
Subject: Re: [lojban] Should I quit learning Lojban?
=20


On Sunday, April 28, 2013 10:27:20 AM UTC+4, Pierre Abbat wrote:
On Saturday, April 27, 2013 22:26:34 la gleki wrote:=20
>> In {la .alis. cu remna} Alice can refer to several people as well.=20
>> Referential use of {le} can help if two participants of the conversation=
=20
>> have agreed for which object to use it however even in that case there=
=20
>> might be misunderstanding ( what if speaker A called an apple {le plise}=
=20
>> but the speaker B unlike the speaker B noticed several apples around).=
=20
>>=20
>> Other brivla in Lojban are all properties.=20
>> I guess in {lo plise cu xunre} {xunre} is a property, right?=20
>>=20
>> Then for me the following raising doesn't mean much.=20
>> {mi viska lo plise noi xunre}=20
>> {mi viska lo xunre}=20
>>=20
>> And of course lo plise =3D zo'e noi plise.=20
>>=20
>> (If we for the first time in our life see an orange we might call it {ti=
=20
>> plise ga'a mi'a}, so {plise} is also a property).=20
>>=20
>> So I just can't see why Lojban is SAE.=20
>
>SAE sensu stricto includes Romance, Germanic, and various other European=
=20
>languages. SAE sensu lato includes, as far as I can see, all of Indo-Europ=
ean,=20
>Finno-Ugric, Turkic, Semitic, and probably other families. Either way, it'=
s=20
>defined by properties of the language, not by belonging to certain familie=
s.=20
>


As far as I remember [sei u'i mi morji jenai vedli ;) ] the first written r=
ecord in human=A0history=A0was a Sumerian record that said "A new divine Su=
n has appeared in the sky". We can assume that it was a supernova star (I d=
on't remember in what constellation it is located now).

This is a funny fact because then the human written history starts with the=
 fact of dealing with property language and actually extending unique objec=
ts to properties.

So what, Sumerian is also SAE and property-lang at the same time like Engli=
sh? What's the point?
That inhabitants of Tlon *had* to use only properties in their speech? =A0B=
ut as I show everything can be seen as properties.


>Lojban is definitely not SAE s.s. I think it is not SAE s.l. either, but=
=20
>appears to be because most Lojbanists are native speakers of SAE languages=
. If=20
>we raised Lojban speakers for whom e.g. "le blabi cu mlatu" or "se mlatu l=
e=20
>blabi" were no stranger a construction than "le mlatu cu blabi", Lojban as=
=20
>they spoke it would not be SAE s.l.=20
>
>I'm not sure I understand "things with holes and things to plug the holes"=
,=20
>but unlike all the language families I listed above, Lojban has no adjecti=
ves.=20


isn't NOI or even tanru adjectives?
=A0

>Lojban does have nouns, but their use is severely restricted compared to S=
AE=20
>languages, common nouns being generally expressed by verbs.=20
>


Really? You mean that only KOhA, {zo'e}, {da}, cmene etc. are nouns?
I've never had any problems with {lo ... ku} =A0even though it is a derivat=
ion of zo'e + NOI.

brivla are always verbs. (mlatu =3D to-be-a-cat etc.)


>> I have the following case unsolved:=20
>> <quote>The classic contrast between an SAE language and a process one is=
=20
>> the name of a wet spot in the Grand Canyon area. =A0The Anglos call it=
=20
>> Weeping Spring, a thing with a property. =A0The Hopi call it Whiting=20
>> Downward, a process.</quote>=20
>>=20
>> How to say "I'm near the whiting downward" in this language then?=20
>> I guess in Lojban we can't say {mi jibni lo nu farlu}. How can i be near=
 a=20
>> process? I can only be near some atoms taking part in that process.=20
>> How do the Hopi solve this problem?=20
>
>I'd say it in Lojban "mi jibni le mo'ini'a blabi" (or "la mo'ini'a blabi"=
=20
>since it's a name).


Exactly. But {le blabi} =A0is a noun.

I don't know Hopi. I assume you do not mean "mo'ini'a=20
>merlanu".=20
>

Yes, I want Hopi's solution, not lojbanic cheating.
--=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.

--=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.


--1009959307-433294583-1367185250=:6160
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><span>This is al=
l getting very confusing to me; I either don't get the point of various com=
ments or I don't see the relevance of them to what I think is the topic at =
hand (which long ago ceased to be about learning Lojban -- we ought to chan=
ge the title).&nbsp; Let try to sort some things out for my own benefit.</s=
pan></div><div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: =
times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-s=
tyle: normal;"><span>SAEss is a late derivative (and probably the result of=
 a misunderstanding) of SAEsl, a term Whorf apparently coined.&nbsp; It hap=
pens that all of the ss languages are also sl, which reenforces the confusi=
on.</span></div><div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-fa=
mily: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent;
 font-style: normal;"><span>The fact that Lojban has adjectives and verbs a=
nd common nouns -- or doesn't -- is largely irrelevant to the question whet=
her it is a SAE ("thing"), property, process or sensation language.&nbsp; I=
t can (more or less by design) reproduce the effects of all sorts of langua=
ges, but to do so, it must convert properties or processes or sensations in=
to things.&nbsp; Well, not convert actually, since they already are in Lojb=
an -- a property is a set of things (and sets are things, too) or a functio=
n (another thing) from worlds (things) to such sets.&nbsp; I assume that th=
e converse would happen in a process or property&nbsp; or sensation languag=
e, with things represented by properties or processes or sensations, as the=
 case might be.&nbsp; <br></span></div><div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); f=
ont-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; backgrou=
nd-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><span>Nor does the fact
 that an NP can refer to several things matter or even that it does in a pa=
rticular situation (xorlo -- in one of its later and more solid forms&nbsp;=
 -- to the rescue. &nbsp; Note that {le broda} refers to just what it does =
and the existence of other things like that are irrelevant, unlike {lo brod=
a}in some circumstances).&nbsp; (the bit about {zo'e} is one of the strange=
r myths, since {zo'e} is merely a contradictory word without a real use -- =
a weak foundation for anything -- while {lo}, for example, is quite precise=
 and clear).</span></div><div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px=
; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: tran=
sparent; font-style: normal;"><span>I don't get the Sumerian story (I would=
 have assumed it was announcing a new king, for one thing).&nbsp; The trans=
lation into English is, inevitably thing-language; don't know what the orig=
inal was like but I don't see anything particularly property
 languageish here.</span></div><div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size=
: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color=
: transparent; font-style: normal;"><span>Is the unclarity just a confusion=
 between verbs and processes, adjectives and properties, nouns and things?&=
nbsp; It seems so, though I don't believe any of us actually has such confu=
sions (though I have to admit that Whorf might). <br></span></div><div>But =
we do talk as though we had this.&nbsp; I suspect (without great confidence=
, admittedly) that property / process /sensation grammars start S =3D&gt; N=
P + VP.&nbsp; The difference is somewhere else and I don't know where it is=
, exactly.<br></div><div><br></div>  <div style=3D"font-family: times new r=
oman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div style=3D"font-family:=
 times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div dir=3D"lt=
r"> <hr size=3D"1">  <font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2"> <b><span
 style=3D"font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> la gleki &lt;gleki.is.my.name=
@gmail.com&gt;<br> <b><span style=3D"font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> loj=
ban@googlegroups.com <br> <b><span style=3D"font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span=
></b> Sunday, April 28, 2013 5:16 AM<br> <b><span style=3D"font-weight: bol=
d;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [lojban] Should I quit learning Lojban?<br> </f=
ont> </div> <div class=3D"y_msg_container"><br>
<div id=3D"yiv841157215"><br><br>On Sunday, April 28, 2013 10:27:20 AM UTC+=
4, Pierre Abbat wrote:<blockquote class=3D"yiv841157215gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;=
">On Saturday, April 27, 2013 22:26:34 la gleki wrote:
<br>&gt; In {la .alis. cu remna} Alice can refer to several people as well.
<br>&gt; Referential use of {le} can help if two participants of the conver=
sation
<br>&gt; have agreed for which object to use it however even in that case t=
here
<br>&gt; might be misunderstanding ( what if speaker A called an apple {le =
plise}
<br>&gt; but the speaker B unlike the speaker B noticed several apples arou=
nd).
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Other brivla in Lojban are all properties.
<br>&gt; I guess in {lo plise cu xunre} {xunre} is a property, right?
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Then for me the following raising doesn't mean much.
<br>&gt; {mi viska lo plise noi xunre}
<br>&gt; {mi viska lo xunre}
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; And of course lo plise =3D zo'e noi plise.
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; (If we for the first time in our life see an orange we might call =
it {ti
<br>&gt; plise ga'a mi'a}, so {plise} is also a property).
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; So I just can't see why Lojban is SAE.
<br>
<br>SAE sensu stricto includes Romance, Germanic, and various other Europea=
n=20
<br>languages. SAE sensu lato includes, as far as I can see, all of Indo-Eu=
ropean,=20
<br>Finno-Ugric, Turkic, Semitic, and probably other families. Either way, =
it's=20
<br>defined by properties of the language, not by belonging to certain fami=
lies.
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>As far as I remember [s=
ei u'i mi morji jenai vedli ;) ] the first written record in human&nbsp;his=
tory&nbsp;was a Sumerian record that said "A new divine Sun has appeared in=
 the sky". We can assume that it was a supernova star (I don't remember in =
what constellation it is located now).</div><div><br></div><div>This is a f=
unny fact because then the human written history starts with the fact of de=
aling with property language and actually extending unique objects to prope=
rties.</div><div><br></div><div>So what, Sumerian is also SAE and property-=
lang at the same time like English? What's the point?</div><div>That inhabi=
tants of Tlon *had* to use only properties in their speech? &nbsp;But as I =
show everything can be seen as properties.</div><div><br></div><blockquote =
class=3D"yiv841157215gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;borde=
r-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>Lojban is definitely not SAE s.s. I think it is not SAE s.l. either, bu=
t=20
<br>appears to be because most Lojbanists are native speakers of SAE langua=
ges. If=20
<br>we raised Lojban speakers for whom e.g. "le blabi cu mlatu" or "se mlat=
u le=20
<br>blabi" were no stranger a construction than "le mlatu cu blabi", Lojban=
 as=20
<br>they spoke it would not be SAE s.l.
<br>
<br>I'm not sure I understand "things with holes and things to plug the hol=
es",=20
<br>but unlike all the language families I listed above, Lojban has no adje=
ctives. </blockquote><div><br></div><div><br>isn't NOI or even tanru adject=
ives?</div><div>&nbsp;</div><blockquote class=3D"yiv841157215gmail_quote" s=
tyle=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:=
1ex;">
<br>Lojban does have nouns, but their use is severely restricted compared t=
o SAE=20
<br>languages, common nouns being generally expressed by verbs.
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Really? You mean that o=
nly KOhA, {zo'e}, {da}, cmene etc. are nouns?</div><div>I've never had any =
problems with {lo ... ku} &nbsp;even though it is a derivation of zo'e + NO=
I.</div><div><br></div><div>brivla are always verbs. (mlatu =3D to-be-a-cat=
 etc.)</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"yiv841157215gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1=
ex;">
<br>&gt; I have the following case unsolved:
<br>&gt; &lt;quote&gt;The classic contrast between an SAE language and a pr=
ocess one is
<br>&gt; the name of a wet spot in the Grand Canyon area. &nbsp;The Anglos =
call it
<br>&gt; Weeping Spring, a thing with a property. &nbsp;The Hopi call it Wh=
iting
<br>&gt; Downward, a process.&lt;/quote&gt;
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; How to say "I'm near the whiting downward" in this language then?
<br>&gt; I guess in Lojban we can't say {mi jibni lo nu farlu}. How can i b=
e near a
<br>&gt; process? I can only be near some atoms taking part in that process=
.
<br>&gt; How do the Hopi solve this problem?
<br>
<br>I'd say it in Lojban "mi jibni le mo'ini'a blabi" (or "la mo'ini'a blab=
i"=20
<br>since it's a name).</blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Exac=
tly. But {le blabi} &nbsp;is a noun.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=
=3D"yiv841157215gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-lef=
t:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> I don't know Hopi. I assume you do not=
 mean "mo'ini'a=20
<br>merlanu".
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, I want Hopi's solution, not lojba=
nic cheating.</div>


-- <br>
You received 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 e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br>
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br>
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.<br>
For more options, visit <a rel=3D"nofollow" target=3D"_blank" href=3D"https=
://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_o=
ut</a>.<br>
&nbsp;<br>
&nbsp;<br>
</div><br><br></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 />

--1009959307-433294583-1367185250=:6160--