From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Oct 28 13:53:03 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:53:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EVbDZ-0001Xy-Tp for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:52:54 -0700 Received: from xproxy.gmail.com ([66.249.82.200]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1EVbDY-0001Xp-Md for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:52:53 -0700 Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id h29so514847wxd for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:52:51 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=JMYEnNR/lViTsclp+cGW5WfO2KOU0gOyjGVj8G4NzvTSN9t4UNYGz7J2uEZsuoQphWMdQZ8FKsZ5+WvHFb2ou3GjUgqWYQWW2j7eBsCK9LsValfSfm/wjuWDorzD2cZUWzTjz6kADghNYkgvwjit+qkVaxfX78/UrYpxsNItHeg= Received: by 10.70.53.17 with SMTP id b17mr516758wxa; Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:52:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.117.10 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:52:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <12d58c160510281352n2b7b6df9ob99f792ae111de31@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 16:52:51 -0400 From: Adam COOPER To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: citri lo glibau In-Reply-To: <925d17560510281319m7743833cjfc19d3b80d5b9060@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6926_503806.1130532771838" References: <12d58c160510280915x764d9b8du4ba3f9a68d9742e1@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560510281139g37adf21cta7dabb247fb1ba61@mail.gmail.com> <12d58c160510281239g30f78bcbs3454b30506e7ca62@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560510281319m7743833cjfc19d3b80d5b9060@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-archive-position: 10741 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: adamgarrigus@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list ------=_Part_6926_503806.1130532771838 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 10/28/05, Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote: > > Hmm... In the context, reasons are being provided for why English > lost many inflections. Presumably the fact that many speakers were > conquered & uneducated & Welsh & peasants is said to have > contributed to this. Does the ordering and grouping have anything > to do with the fact that these words are noun, pure adjective, > verbal adjectives in English? Would saying {tercange je natmrkamri > je tolselctu je se sadgunta} for example give a very different impression= ? > Are "essential" properties more likely to appear as tertau and > "accidental" ones as seltau? Well, I was going to post about replacing {ri'a} with {se ja'e} { .i ku'i lo nunvlastika cu ze'u lujyjdika .i ri'a bo tu'e pa mai pi so'i l= o selbau cu ke se sadgunta je tolselctu ke'e natmrkamri tercange } because the reasons are a little more complicated than that. An uneducated= , illiterate community that suddenly begins to speak a foreign language tends to creolize/pidginize/simplify it. I think the evolution of the Romance languages from Latin is an example of this phenomenon as well. So really I've performed a series of conceptual substitutions: uneducated, illiterate -> tolselctu je tercange suddenly -> se sadgunta foreign -> natmrkamri I figured that a Lojban speaker interested in language history (the intende= d audience of the essay) would be able to take the implied logical steps. I could always flesh it out, I suppose. As for tanru in general -- yeah, what is the distinction between say {ta blanu bolci} {ta bolci blanu} {ta bolci je blanu} ? mu'o mi'e ??????????? ------=_Part_6926_503806.1130532771838 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 10/28/05, Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
Hmm... In the context, reasons are being provided for why English
lost m= any inflections. Presumably the fact that many speakers were
conquered &= amp; uneducated & Welsh & peasants is said to have
contributed t= o this. Does the ordering and grouping have anything
to do with the fact that these words are noun, pure adjective,
verba= l adjectives in English? Would saying {tercange je natmrkamri
je tolselc= tu je se sadgunta} for example give a very different impression?
Are &qu= ot;essential" properties more likely to appear as tertau and
"accidental" ones as seltau?

Well, I was going to post about replacing {ri'a} with {se ja'e}

{ .i ku'i lo nunvlastika cu ze'u lujyjdik= a .i ri'a bo tu'e pa mai pi so'i lo selbau cu ke se sadgunta je tolselctu ke'e natmrkamri tercange }

because the reasons are a little more complicated than that. An uneducated, illiterate community that suddenly begins to speak a foreign language tends to creolize/pidginize/simplify it. I think the evolution of the Romance languages from Latin is an example of this phenomenon as well. So really I've performed a series of conceptual substitutions:

uneducated, illiterate -> tolselctu je tercange
suddenly -> se sadgunta
foreign -> natmrkamri

I figured that a Lojban speaker interested in language history (the intended audience of the essay) would be able to take the implied logical steps. I could always flesh it out, I suppose.

As for tanru in general -- yeah, what is the distinction between say {ta bl= anu bolci} {ta bolci blanu} {ta bolci je blanu} ?

mu'o mi'e ??????????? ------=_Part_6926_503806.1130532771838-- To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.