Received: from mail-pa0-f56.google.com ([209.85.220.56]:46602) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UWqyw-0001Pl-PS for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:31:28 -0700 Received: by mail-pa0-f56.google.com with SMTP id bj3sf877747pad.11 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:31:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:received-spf :x-yahoo-newman-property:x-yahoo-newman-id:x-ymail-osg :x-rocket-mimeinfo:x-mailer:references:message-id:date:from:reply-to :subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=0Kqs2+UsxsXwh9KcM3CQpG6VULir8hE50yg2PkHo2d8=; b=Ho+wA71PQSGVaQ8CPv9JWXkv9mJlm0rI7+mgaTjKxjCI2fJj05z5KqRVX7apykMIg0 bdwRzWFYdYtUDFnhuSY9j7tYq0JIR4NPzdi06NU6wUVaFSgZmEruD9c1j/fkkWlrqbe8 zPssL1XC2d3qUXh1znM3Eo+pz8PWzGO/ns6W4RP7aJoEP2k4gn58M9yWvEm5tfDz5ahQ 74eQhLcyXm7J8vuViCEM1CTtrWzHJ0cOmNRXSPI2AhAuLCVnGv5j0KSwGp/aHAjg7tgA XUqhXy1GgPZk/OpDWOtyxrvLWSJaLHxT5gCGz1peQ9oobXyjq91UcuFA+LcZ06JVVO13 pUyg== X-Received: by 10.49.40.168 with SMTP id y8mr710465qek.9.1367253068341; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:31:08 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.49.36.69 with SMTP id o5ls2623251qej.55.gmail; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:31:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.236.36.44 with SMTP id v32mr8224558yha.33.1367253066857; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:31:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm21-vm0.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com (nm21-vm0.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com. [66.94.236.31]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n23si701068yhi.7.2013.04.29.09.31.06 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:31:06 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.236.31 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.94.236.31; Received: from [66.94.237.198] by nm21.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Apr 2013 16:31:06 -0000 Received: from [66.94.237.99] by tm9.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Apr 2013 16:31:06 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1004.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Apr 2013 16:31:06 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 200694.39844.bm@omp1004.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 21360 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Apr 2013 16:31:05 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: Ykbn0cEVM1kPkoqmL0TOVZX_0PQ9lkWcSGLHoA54Pbb2F3B FqIMVI0Yj.j5QNljQqoTVC5inRQDMnQU2tVHcXXg8fNYqtYTkDq5UBOd6vRP dI_.KmhOpy7ZSsYxiU7JXw2FflcPrSy_Nt9WztDwmIEBqAyz6QfglLzGlGGv pn2e8PRmtlz_B.gc.2RLWj4ghtyKuFV7FhWO_LQ_1eq2pKwSEKQkP7VbzKTA vAdMCnIIOMLAluLWVcP.yaVEkxNyw_m5ntoT8r97myPwnuaxhfGdkdMGwOIO KkHZRe2dDfbngbfcLpPXy7sZXADOc62MA_Mx1x6aXHFeus9twP.dH3x12lSg K7QfTUgb_wyoPLG9XQ3ODmqnDmU.oEsOrEm5zlZBUHXSuZGpf0U.gLNSqJuC 6fsBspQBQIFTgSk6w2wkpnJ2imamqkDZ4uxzvyhZM6RewqgLirri1s5cZWT. HdG5Yf0tygJQrmNOfzP62VPDO6pCWwrgg3kCvSTtZarRlwJh85wjBv7nkJ5z A9gqVAqU873.K4zyjhObLvYbQDgfvLyD81i4dyoHHFEQyXGe4c.MnBIUHxtK YB7eA1lvtT9EZuyKbHrYZGzM1qM5.ZacgCnBqyohRQ1SSKpmx.NbnbwEjHB8 4zYuGVicFDi1BxDz6HjiKpchO.bC76H.Npjwuy.BeTL76bSRL9N3UB1sx40f WKY4EuQjcynxFVAzpNyo54kWm6jULrvh8MWJsJlHk6q15N5_8mINHrXSWDHW Bm1EkcDgWQPAk7wir Received: from [99.92.108.194] by web184404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:31:05 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001,UGVyc29uYWxseSwgSSdkIGxlYXZlIG91dCB0aGUgIkNhbiBsYW5ndWFnZSBpbmZsdWVuY2UgdGhvdWdodD8iIHF1ZXN0aW9uIGFzIGJlaW5nIHNvIGFtYmlndW91cyB0aGF0IHRoZSBhbnN3ZXJzIHJ1biB0aGUgZ2FtdXQgZnJvbSBwYXRlbnRseSBmYWxzZSB0byBnbGFyaW5nbHkgb2J2aW91cywgZGVwZW5kaW5nIG9uIGhvdyB0aGUgcXVlc3Rpb24gaXMgZm9ybXVsYXRlZCBwcmVjaXNlbHkgKG5vdCBTIG5vciBXJ3MgZm9ydGUgLS0gYW5kIHN1Y2Nlc3NvcnMgaGF2ZSBub3QgZG9uZSBtdWNoIGJldHRlcikuwqABMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.141.536 References: Message-ID: <1367253065.1903.YahooMailNeo@web184404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:31:05 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Languages (other than Lojban) that are structurally incompatible with Standard Average European To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.236.31 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass header.i=@yahoo.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: multipart/alternative; boundary="-420974808-111329288-1367253065=:1903" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / ---420974808-111329288-1367253065=:1903 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Personally, I'd leave out the "Can language influence thought?" question as= being so ambiguous that the answers run the gamut from patently false to g= laringly obvious, depending on how the question is formulated precisely (no= t S nor W's forte -- and successors have not done much better).=A0 The ques= tion of how radically different languages from SAE work is much more intere= sting and may even have ans answer (one possible one being,=A0 of course, t= hat , appearances to the contrary, all human languages are SAE). ________________________________ From: la gleki To: lojban@googlegroups.com=20 Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 8:00 AM Subject: [lojban] Languages (other than Lojban) that are structurally incom= patible with Standard Average European =20 This is the continuation of discussing exotic languages (natural, artificia= l ones, unusual styles in those etc.) and whether they are incompatible with Standard Average European languages. Simply put what we are discussing here is "Can language influence thought?"= and if this question is correct. We also search for specific examples of how languages can be constructed un= like those that most of us speak. This discussion is not necessarily relevant to Lojban (although resume from= it could be applied to Lojban later). Tags for this discussion (separated by comma):=20 Sapir Whorf hypothesis, linguistic relativity, Sapir, Whorf, snow in Eskimo= , Wilhelm von Humboldt, Chomsky, Pinker, Wierzbicka, Lakoff, ... On Sunday, April 28, 2013 2:16:36 PM UTC+4, la gleki wrote: > >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:=A0 >>> In {la .alis. cu remna} Alice can refer to several people as well.=A0 >>> Referential use of {le} can help if two participants of the conversatio= n=A0 >>> have agreed for which object to use it however even in that case there= =A0 >>> might be misunderstanding ( what if speaker A called an apple {le plise= }=A0 >>> but the speaker B unlike the speaker B noticed several apples around).= =A0 >>>=A0 >>> Other brivla in Lojban are all properties.=A0 >>> I guess in {lo plise cu xunre} {xunre} is a property, right?=A0 >>>=A0 >>> Then for me the following raising doesn't mean much.=A0 >>> {mi viska lo plise noi xunre}=A0 >>> {mi viska lo xunre}=A0 >>>=A0 >>> And of course lo plise =3D zo'e noi plise.=A0 >>>=A0 >>> (If we for the first time in our life see an orange we might call it {t= i=A0 >>> plise ga'a mi'a}, so {plise} is also a property).=A0 >>>=A0 >>> So I just can't see why Lojban is SAE.=A0 >> >>SAE sensu stricto includes Romance, Germanic, and various other European= =A0 >>languages. SAE sensu lato includes, as far as I can see, all of Indo-Euro= pean,=A0 >>Finno-Ugric, Turkic, Semitic, and probably other families. Either way, it= 's=A0 >>defined by properties of the language, not by belonging to certain famili= es.=A0 >> > > > > >As far as I remember [sei u'i mi morji jenai vedli ;) ] the first written = record in human=A0history=A0was a Sumerian record that said "A new divine S= un 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). > > >This is a funny fact because then the human written history starts with th= e fact of dealing with property language and actually extending unique obje= cts to properties. > > >So what, Sumerian is also SAE and property-lang at the same time like Engl= ish? What's the point? >That inhabitants of Tlon *had* to use only properties in their speech? =A0= But 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= =A0 >>appears to be because most Lojbanists are native speakers of SAE language= s. If=A0 >>we raised Lojban speakers for whom e.g. "le blabi cu mlatu" or "se mlatu = le=A0 >>blabi" were no stranger a construction than "le mlatu cu blabi", Lojban a= s=A0 >>they spoke it would not be SAE s.l.=A0 >> >>I'm not sure I understand "things with holes and things to plug the holes= ",=A0 >>but unlike all the language families I listed above, Lojban has no adject= ives. > > > >isn't NOI or even tanru adjectives? >=A0 > >>Lojban does have nouns, but their use is severely restricted compared to = SAE=A0 >>languages, common nouns being generally expressed by verbs.=A0 >> > > > > >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 deriva= tion of zo'e + NOI. > > >brivla are always verbs. (mlatu =3D to-be-a-cat etc.) > > > >>> I have the following case unsolved:=A0 >>> The classic contrast between an SAE language and a process one i= s=A0 >>> the name of a wet spot in the Grand Canyon area. =A0The Anglos call it= =A0 >>> Weeping Spring, a thing with a property. =A0The Hopi call it Whiting=A0 >>> Downward, a process.=A0 >>>=A0 >>> How to say "I'm near the whiting downward" in this language then?=A0 >>> I guess in Lojban we can't say {mi jibni lo nu farlu}. How can i be nea= r a=A0 >>> process? I can only be near some atoms taking part in that process.=A0 >>> How do the Hopi solve this problem?=A0 >> >>I'd say it in Lojban "mi jibni le mo'ini'a blabi" (or "la mo'ini'a blabi"= =A0 >>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=A0 >>merlanu".=A0 >> > > >Yes, I want Hopi's solution, not lojbanic cheating. =A0 On Monday, April 29, 2013 5:39:31 AM UTC+4, lojbab wrote: John E Clifford wrote:=A0 >> This is all getting very confusing to me; I either don't get the point= =A0 >> of various comments or I don't see the relevance of them to what I think= =A0 >> is the topic at hand (which long ago ceased to be about learning Lojban= =A0 >> -- we ought to change the title). =A0Let try to sort some things out for= =A0 >> my own benefit.=A0 >> SAEss is a late derivative (and probably the result of a=A0 >> misunderstanding) of SAEsl, a term Whorf apparently coined. =A0It happen= s=A0 >> that all of the ss languages are also sl, which reenforces the confusion= .=A0 >> The fact that Lojban has adjectives and verbs and common nouns -- or=A0 >> doesn't -- is largely irrelevant to the question whether it is a SAE=A0 >> ("thing"), property, process or sensation language.=A0 > >lo, loka lopu'u, and loli'i should be able to express these,=A0 >respectively (and we have a few other abstractors as well. =A0Whether they= =A0 >semantically match the targeted languages is less clear.=A0 > >I guess you might argue that sticking lo on a property, process, etc=A0 >makes it grammatically a "thing", but I think that is an artifact of=A0 >translating the expressions into English, where sumti become grammatical= =A0 >nouns or gerunds. =A0Nora has always looked at brivla as being more=A0 >verblike than any other part of speech, with the various cmavo acting on= =A0 >the grammatical roles but not really changing the Lojban semantics=A0 >(though again translating the semantics into English tends to invoke=A0 >English parts of speech).=A0 > >I am still remembering my efforts at translating Nootka, wherein I=A0 >expressed entire sentences as complex tanru, never using any sumti at all.= =A0 > >> It can (more or=A0 >> less by design) reproduce the effects of all sorts of languages, but to= =A0 >> do so, it must convert properties or processes or sensations into=A0 >> things.=A0 > >No. =A0cmavo convert brivla into sumti or mexso or ..., but none of those= =A0 >are necessarily "things".=A0 > >lojbab=A0 > > >--=A0 >Bob LeChevalier =A0 =A0loj...@lojban.org=A0=A0 =A0www.lojban.org=A0 >President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.=A0 > --=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. ---420974808-111329288-1367253065=:1903 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Personally= , I'd leave out the "Can language influence thought?" question as being so = ambiguous that the answers run the gamut from patently false to glaringly o= bvious, depending on how the question is formulated precisely (not S nor W'= s forte -- and successors have not done much better).  The question of= how radically different languages from SAE work is much more interesting a= nd may even have ans answer (one possible one being,  of course, that = , appearances to the contrary, all human languages are SAE).

From: la gleki <gleki.is.my.name= @gmail.com>
To: loj= ban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 8:00 AM
Subject: [lojban] Languages (other than Lojban) that are str= ucturally incompatible with Standard Average European

This is the continuation of discussing exotic lan= guages (natural, artificial ones, unusual styles in those etc.)
and whe= ther they are incompatible with Standard Average European languages.
<= div>
Simply put what we are discussing here is "Can language = influence thought?" and if this question is correct.
We al= so search for specific examples of how languages can be constructed unlike = those that most of us speak.

This discussion is no= t necessarily relevant to Lojban (although resume from it could be applied = to Lojban later).

Tags for this discussion (separa= ted by comma):
Sapir Whorf hypothesis, linguistic relativity, Sapir, Wh= orf, snow in Eskimo, Wilhelm von Humboldt, Chomsky, Pinker, Wierzbicka, Lak= off, ...

On Sunday, April 28, 2013 2:16:36 PM UTC+4, la gleki wrote:=


On Sunday, April 28, 2013 10:27:2= 0 AM UTC+4, Pierre Abbat wrote:
On Saturday= , April 27, 2013 22:26:34 la gleki wrote: 
> In {la .alis. cu re= mna} Alice can refer to several people as well. 
> Referential u= se of {le} can help if two participants of the conversation 
> h= ave agreed for which object to use it however even in that case there =
> might be misunderstanding ( what if speaker A called an apple {le = plise} 
> but the speaker B unlike the speaker B noticed several= apples around). 
> 
> Other brivla in Lojban are all= properties. 
> I guess in {lo plise cu xunre} {xunre} is a property, right? 
> 
> Then for me the following rai= sing doesn't mean much. 
> {mi viska lo plise noi xunre} > {mi viska lo xunre} 
> 
> And of course lo pli= se =3D zo'e noi plise. 
> 
> (If we for the first tim= e in our life see an orange we might call it {ti 
> plise ga'a m= i'a}, so {plise} is also a property). 
> 
> So I just= can't see why Lojban is SAE. 

SAE sensu stricto includes Roman= ce, Germanic, and various other European 
languages. SAE sensu lato= includes, as far as I can see, all of Indo-European, 
Finno-Ugric,= Turkic, Semitic, and probably other families. Either way, it's 
de= fined by properties of the language, not by belonging to certain families.&= nbsp;


As far as I rememb= er [sei u'i mi morji jenai vedli ;) ] the first written record in human history 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>This is a funny fact because then the human written history starts with= the fact of dealing with property language and actually extending unique o= bjects to properties.

So what, Sumerian is also SA= E and property-lang at the same time like English? What's the point?
<= div>That inhabitants of Tlon *had* to use only properties in their speech? =  But 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 
appears to be because most Lojbanists are native speakers of SAE languages. If 
we raise= d Lojban speakers for whom e.g. "le blabi cu mlatu" or "se mlatu le blabi" were no stranger a construction than "le mlatu cu blabi", Lojban a= s 
they spoke it would not be SAE s.l. 

I'm not sure I = understand "things with holes and things to plug the holes", 
but u= nlike all the language families I listed above, Lojban has no adjectives.


isn't NOI or even tanru adjectives?
 

Lojban does have nou= ns, but their use is severely restricted compared to SAE 
languages= , common nouns being generally expressed by verbs. 


Really? You mean that only KOhA, {zo'e}, {da}, cmene etc. are nouns?
I've never had any problems = with {lo ... ku}  even though it is a derivation of zo'e + NOI.
<= div>
brivla are always verbs. (mlatu =3D to-be-a-cat etc.)


> I have the foll= owing case unsolved: 
> <quote>The classic contrast betwee= n an SAE language and a process one is 
> the name of a wet spot= in the Grand Canyon area.  The Anglos call it 
> Weeping S= pring, a thing with a property.  The Hopi call it Whiting 
>= ; Downward, a process.</quote> 
> 
> How to say= "I'm near the whiting downward" in this language then? 
> I gue= ss in Lojban we can't say {mi jibni lo nu farlu}. How can i be near a 
> process? I can only be near some atoms taking part in that= process. 
> How do the Hopi solve this problem? 

I'= d say it in Lojban "mi jibni le mo'ini'a blabi" (or "la mo'ini'a blabi"&nbs= p;
since it's a name).


Ex= actly. But {le blabi}  is a noun.

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

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

&nb= sp;

On Monday, April 29, 2013 5:39:31 AM UTC+4, lojbab wrote:John E Clifford wrote:&nbs= p;
> This is all getting very confusing to me; I either don't get the= point 
> of various comments or I don't see the relevance of th= em to what I think 
> is the topic at hand (which long ago cease= d to be about learning Lojban 
> -- we ought to change the title= ).  Let try to sort some things out for 
> my own benefit.&= nbsp;
> SAEss is a late derivative (and probably the result of a = ;
> misunderstanding) of SAEsl, a term Whorf apparently coined.  = ;It happens 
> that all of the ss languages are also sl, which r= eenforces the confusion. 
> The fact that Lojban has adjectives = and verbs and common nouns -- or 
> doesn't -- is largely irrele= vant to the question whether it is a SAE 
> ("thing"), property,= process or sensation language. 

lo, loka lopu'u, and loli'i should be able to express these, 
respectively (and we have= a few other abstractors as well.  Whether they 
semantically = match the targeted languages is less clear. 

I guess you might = argue that sticking lo on a property, process, etc 
makes it gramma= tically a "thing", but I think that is an artifact of 
translating = the expressions into English, where sumti become grammatical 
nouns= or gerunds.  Nora has always looked at brivla as being more 
= verblike than any other part of speech, with the various cmavo acting on&nb= sp;
the grammatical roles but not really changing the Lojban semantics&n= bsp;
(though again translating the semantics into English tends to invok= e 
English parts of speech). 

I am still remembering my= efforts at translating Nootka, wherein I 
expressed entire sentenc= es as complex tanru, never using any sumti at all. 

> It can (more or 
> less by design) reproduce the effects of all= sorts of languages, but to 
> do so, it must convert properties= or processes or sensations into 
> things. 

No. &nb= sp;cmavo convert brivla into sumti or mexso or ..., but none of those =
are necessarily "things". 

lojbab 


-- =
Bob LeChevalier    loj...@lojba= n.org    www.lojban.org 
President and Founder, T= he Logical Language Group, Inc. 
--
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_o= ut.
 
 


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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.
 
 
---420974808-111329288-1367253065=:1903--