Received: from mail-wg0-f57.google.com ([74.125.82.57]:32943) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1YqijD-0004KQ-Bb for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Fri, 08 May 2015 06:54:16 -0700 Received: by wggy19 with SMTP id y19sf19013465wgg.0 for ; Fri, 08 May 2015 06:54:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=vOCF/Yokd9AuLj33eTQx4EH6wejr8Xra//pk2Lwd0/s=; b=c13c+eQC1dg1NlbbNtXF1DMhKYNVYPQT3iz+cRcdlryvQlAepjG9KfXVVdnp0fE9g+ DquhAP9XekVcZZX2eVRYxY6djX0jV4sJafu70cC45wVzwVqM4nWkRHMR/woyydYuXg6P KpTDMenDhus6Nd6aWYYU9lJ/2Fqx2qURsMZu3DkncKSUBJGdGLxaz1PC+f35PMe6ldKA 8Shsn53OkgFurw6Jrcsx+CqQCS6pImENE7wlu94gKP0DiMFA6+UEUQIW+YLbCumycwjD SLaNaxZIgtb9yEI8mOSTITVPPGPiYyVT0rkslwe2msogizHbYiLubvYbO/BEyWy2tvDo B5ZQ== X-Received: by 10.180.75.133 with SMTP id c5mr29755wiw.7.1431093243895; Fri, 08 May 2015 06:54:03 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.212.71 with SMTP id ni7ls192317wic.37.gmail; Fri, 08 May 2015 06:54:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.85.129 with SMTP id h1mr1935282wiz.6.1431093243404; Fri, 08 May 2015 06:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com (mail-wi0-x234.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c05::234]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ec7si302224wib.3.2015.05.08.06.54.03 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 08 May 2015 06:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::234 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::234; Received: by mail-wi0-x234.google.com with SMTP id n10so28222958wiu.1 for ; Fri, 08 May 2015 06:54:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.181.13.198 with SMTP id fa6mr6538610wid.41.1431093243288; Fri, 08 May 2015 06:54:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.221.167 with HTTP; Fri, 8 May 2015 06:53:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6af25e33-7de5-4b0d-abf6-72192aafdb48@googlegroups.com> References: <494619f2-d28a-4893-a7c2-14c6d78f817c@googlegroups.com> <6af25e33-7de5-4b0d-abf6-72192aafdb48@googlegroups.com> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 16:53:42 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: It's been a long time. To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043d6489681f240515925cec X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::234 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_bar: - --f46d043d6489681f240515925cec Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2015-05-08 15:53 GMT+03:00 Spheniscine : > Actually Pater Noster is clearly {mi'a}, since the "our" clearly doesn't > include the addressee (God/the Father). > Who knows, maybe Father is the father of himself. Also {ma'a} is possible like e.g. Father not only of Christians but even those who don't believe in Him. Similarly with "give us this day our daily bread". > Again {ma'a} would imply that Christians prey of giving bread not only to them but to heathens as well. {mi'a} would mean here something completely different and for some it may sound egoistic. > > On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 5:33:54 PM UTC+8, Spheniscine wrote: > >> coi za'u re'u loi jbotadni >> >> Wow, the memories are flooding back. I was part of that old mailing list >> waaay back when. Checking my email archive it was... 2008? Heh. In that >> time I had discovered much about myself I didn't know about before, found >> some new hobbies. >> >> Well, a conversation about philology and linguistics, both natural and >> constructed, had suddenly reminded me of Lojban; I thought I'd take a peek >> a what happened when I was gone... and... wow. You guys have really gone up >> and remodeled the place. "Dot side", the "xorlo" reform, new *cmavo* like >> *mi'ai*, *la'oi*, etc. (I might still need some of these explained to >> me), rewriting the language primer... not to mention ongoing talk about >> reducing logical connectives to a single set, and even possible abolishment >> of the short *rafsi* system... I was even surprised at little things >> like the deprecation of *tirxu* in favor of *tigra*. After I got over >> the initial shock though, I found myself agreeing with pretty much all >> these changes. >> >> I was never very fluent at Lojban, and I'm not sure how much time I have >> to dedicate to that goal now. But even through all these changes, which I >> quite appreciate for "cleaning up" a lot of clutter, including stuff I >> didn't realize *was* clutter, I still see the elements that attracted me >> in the first place; the idea of a language with both syntactic and semantic >> rigor as core ideals, that challenged assumptions about what language could >> be like. >> >> (Yes, I'm aware that this rigor takes different forms on both cases. The >> syntactic rigor of Lojban eliminates syntactic ambiguity if used correctly, >> but eliminating semantic ambiguity is impossible without specifying and >> tense-marking everything to oblivion. However, semantic *rigor*, though >> not perfect [see the ongoing discussion about *tarci* "star (celestial >> object)" versus "star (shape)"], means that each word represents one >> specific Platonic idea/relation, in contrast to English (and other natural >> languages), where words typically have {Platonic idea/relation + >> connotational baggage + figurative senses + other Platonic ideas/relations >> that may have had some tangential relationship with the original idea and >> figurative senses long ago + unrelated ideas from a completely different >> word that merged into this word}... as an amateur philologist this can be >> quite beautiful in its own right. But I also very much liked the idea of a >> language where one could "say what they mean and mean what they say".) >> >> Anyway, glad to be reacquainted. >> > -- > 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 > email 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/d/optout. > -- 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 email 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/d/optout. --f46d043d6489681f240515925cec Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2015-05-08 15:53 GMT+03:00 Spheniscine <spheniscine@gmail.com&= gt;:
Actually Pater Noster is c= learly {mi'a}, since the "our" clearly doesn't include th= e addressee (God/the Father).

Who kno= ws, maybe Father is the father of himself.
Also {ma'a} is pos= sible like e.g. Father not only of Christians but even those who don't = believe in Him.


Similarly with "give us this day our daily bread".
Again {ma'a} would imply that Christians prey of gi= ving bread not only to them but to heathens as well.
{mi'a} w= ould mean here something completely different and for some it may sound ego= istic.



On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 5:33:54 PM UTC+8, Spheniscine wrote:
coi za'u = re'u loi jbotadni

Wow, the memories are flooding bac= k. I was part of that old mailing list waaay back when. Checking my email a= rchive it was... 2008? Heh. In that time I had discovered much about myself= I didn't know about before, found some new hobbies.

Well, a conversation about philology and linguistics, both natural a= nd constructed, had suddenly reminded me of Lojban; I thought I'd take = a peek a what happened when I was gone... and... wow. You guys have really = gone up and remodeled the place. "Dot side", the "xorlo"= ; reform, new cmavo=C2=A0like mi'ai, la'oi, et= c. (I might still need some of these explained to me), rewriting the langua= ge primer... not to mention ongoing talk about reducing logical connectives= to a single set, and even possible abolishment of the short rafsi s= ystem... I was even surprised at little things like the deprecation of t= irxu=C2=A0in favor of tigra. After I got over the initial shock = though, I found myself agreeing with pretty much all these changes.

I was never very fluent at Lojban, and I'm not sure h= ow much time I have to dedicate to that goal now. But even through all thes= e changes, which I quite appreciate for "cleaning up" a lot of cl= utter, including stuff I didn't realize was clutter, I still see= the elements that attracted me in the first place; the idea of a language = with both syntactic and semantic rigor as core ideals, that challenged assu= mptions about what language could be like.=C2=A0

(= Yes, I'm aware that this rigor takes different forms on both cases. The= syntactic rigor of Lojban eliminates syntactic ambiguity if used correctly= , but eliminating semantic ambiguity is impossible without specifying and t= ense-marking everything to oblivion. However, semantic rigor, though= not perfect [see the ongoing discussion about tarci=C2=A0"star= (celestial object)" versus "star (shape)"], means that each= word represents one specific Platonic idea/relation, in contrast to Englis= h (and other natural languages), where words typically have {Platonic idea/= relation + connotational baggage + figurative senses + other Platonic ideas= /relations that may have had some tangential relationship with the original= idea and figurative senses long ago + unrelated ideas from a completely di= fferent word that merged into this word}... as an amateur philologist this = can be quite beautiful in its own right. But I also very much liked the ide= a of a language where one could "say what they mean and mean what they= say".)

Anyway, glad to be reacquainted.

--
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--f46d043d6489681f240515925cec--