Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of almikes@aol.com designates 205.188.109.201 as permitted sender) client-ip=205.188.109.201;
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 07:40:58 +0100
From: Wuzzy <almikes@aol.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Alice essay
Message-ID: <20131206074058.524db1e8@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALm==BXJQEwKxBhdjhTT8d+Dw5tMHJF048jGk4bs1A-ogW6VBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <529EA55C.40800@kli.org>
	<20131204145028.65d8aa5f@aol.com>
	<CALm==BXJQEwKxBhdjhTT8d+Dw5tMHJF048jGk4bs1A-ogW6VBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam_score: 0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 1
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has
 identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
 has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  Okay, I reread the relevant CLL sections and quickly overlooked
    the new version. The most serious mistakes are already gone or don’t apply:
    - The spelling mistakes (mostly about misspelled gismu) are gone. - I was
    indeed totally wrong about “sai”. So … forget that. :D - “ka'enai” is gone.
    - “’” is not used anymore, only “'”. - Sorry for adding some obvious lujvo
    to the list, like the -gau ones. You’re right that it’s awkward to list them
    and I also was aware that -gau etc. have established rules. I just forgot
    to filter the list throughly. It turns out I had a really old copy on my
   disk. Whoops. [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (0.1 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM          Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
                             (almikes[at]aol.com)
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED          ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
                             See
                             http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
                              for more information.
                             [URIs: googlegroups.com]
  0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
  0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID         DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid

Okay, I reread the relevant CLL sections and quickly overlooked the new
version. The most serious mistakes are already gone or don=92t apply:
- The spelling mistakes (mostly about misspelled gismu) are gone.
- I was indeed totally wrong about =93sai=94. So =85 forget that. :D
- =93ka'enai=94 is gone.
- =93=92=94 is not used anymore, only =93'=94.
- Sorry for adding some obvious lujvo to the list, like the -gau ones.
You=92re right that it=92s awkward to list them and I also was aware that
-gau etc. have established rules. I just forgot to filter the list
throughly.
It turns out I had a really old copy on my disk. Whoops.

But this does not mean my entire post is invalid:
- sumti raising is still used. Seriously, guys, I don=92t really see a
reason to ignore the intended place structure; one could use =93tu'a=94 or
coin a new brivla or whatever to resolve these issues.
- =93KREFU=94 is still used and still wrong=97wheather I am a nitpicker or
not. This has nothing to do with alternative orthographies, since the
text uses the standard alphabet. And the word is in all-caps for no
apparent reason. What does =93KREFU=94, in contrast of =93krefu=94, even me=
an?
And believe it or not, I am not an opponent of alternative
orthographies.
- Even after removing the obvious lujvo, there still remain some
non-obvious lujvo. Two of the =93gasnu=94 and =93binxo=94 lujvo are still n=
ot
obvious.
- It would still be better if those 3 fu'ivla had dictionary entries.
Figuring out fu'ivla from scratch may be impossible if you don=92t know
the source language. For =93cipnrxakuila=94, I was not able to figure out
without looking into the original Alice text.
- The po'onai =93definition=94 consists of a parenthesis inside a vague
note which is an proposal for an unfinished proposal. I suppose this is
not the best source to discuss semantics. ;-) I seem to get the point
here, but clearly the po'onai definition has to be refined.
- =93lu=94=85=93li'u=94 still missing. Damning or not, not using the quotes
changes the sense of the sentences. Try to read the text aloud, maybe
you=92ll see (or hear) the problem here. Indentation other other
typographic conventions should never replace words in Lojban.

PS: =93ka'enai=94 is indeed not grammatical, because it is not allowed to
construct =93CAhA NAI=94 according to the YACC. Unless you can show me via
the YACC that =93ka'enai=94 *is* grammatical, I will stand my ground. Ask
lojbab if you=92re still not convinced.

PPS: WTF? There are seriously people who oppose a lujvo dictionary?
Man. That=92s a very stupid idea. It=92s so stupid, I may write another
e-mail about it.

=3D=3D Appendix =3D=3D
After removing further obvious lujvo, these undefined brivla remain:
- clazengau		(not obvious, since =93claze'a=94 is undefined)
- dutselfarbi'o		(not obvious, =93dutselfa'a=94 is undefined)
- gunkybifce
- re'azbil
- kakcmo
- cfafanmo
- benxai
- flara'a
- kixsku
- xersku
- jetsku
- cfacku
- dzikla
- galvi'a
- titydja
- geirkrixa
- zbikre
- dricmo
- ricmei
- gerpanzi
- proki'u
- nolpratra
- cabycerni
- sezmerli
- jaurjanci
- jmaji'o
- vruva'u
- gapfa'a
- purcedra		(sounds like =93history=94; not sure)
- xersmadi
- daupro
- sipfru
- fagystizu
- gerpanzi		(dog-child?)
- posycu'a
- sincycau	=09
- fityti'i
- stuzrlongitudi	(longitude?)
- stuzrlatitudi		(latitude?)
- rirxyxirma		(hippo? but which species?)
- cipnrxakuila		(eagle? but which species?)
- tcicymlatu		(obviously that=92s the chesire cat, this one
			 may be an exception)

--=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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.