From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Jul 03 15:02:37 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:02:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FxWUk-0007Q4-O6 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:02:18 -0700 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.178]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FxWUh-0007Pv-5I for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:02:16 -0700 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id 39so1109775pyu for ; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:02:13 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=cxxyfUZDK4WP1Hc4SmLRTpd+7XurtEDGmF71lzrPvOK3gFb4PaJ3fJNqEGZgMBM9MaBI8wBsR/KAuVTTGO0876CMIgW28iuSD6b9MXGcHFHexkle63LV+8pKm7x/O5iYO+eiZ1W+j4UMImMoESzsMNxqchn+9w7beUhYrxE+cuY= Received: by 10.35.90.20 with SMTP id s20mr1379829pyl; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.100? ( [70.224.74.45]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id k62sm2243764pyk.2006.07.03.15.02.13; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <44A99334.2030200@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 17:59:16 -0400 From: Hugh O'Byrne User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: [hobyrne: Alphabet] References: <20060630161352.GG11235@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20060630232721.15247.qmail@web56404.mail.re3.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 11892 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: hobyrne@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Matt Arnold wrote: > Hugh, > > Thanks for your contribution! Thanks for your reply :) it is definitely one of the kindest ones I've received. > Certainly, if anyone wishes to write Lojban in the Visual Speech > alphabet, nothing is stopping them. It would not really be a change to > the language itself. I myself wish to write Lojban in VS from time to > time when creating webcomics, Lojbanimations, and other artistic > pursuits in which characters live in a Lojban-speaking culture. It's > fun and attractive and cool. This would be a great visual addition to > the worldbuilding of a "Lojban-born" setting. I'm glad you like VS too, and see it meshing well with Lojban too (at least sometimes). It means I'm not *completely* crazy and out-of-place here! As I've said in another post, though, I'm nudging the crusade from VS to RPA. I don't see this as a terribly large change in direction, ideologically anyway, but it is a more precise target, and so may make the difference to some people. > The question is, should it be made mandatory so that others, by virtue > of knowing Lojban, will be able to read your Lojban when you do so? On > balance, I think not, for several reasons. > > Keyboards, email clients, web browsers, IM clients, and IRC chatrooms > are not set up to use the character set. I have admitted to having little regard for social inertia. ASCII, however, has so much damn weight behind it, I can't ignore it. I'm thinking long-term, though. I'm thinking of when ASCII is finally, blessedly dropped for Unicode (or its successor), and all related technology follows. What a glorious day that will be! > In order to have someone to communicate to in Lojban, we need people > to learn the language. So it's good to prevent an overwhelming number > of simultaneous barriers to learning. They can always learn Lojban in > the Latin alphabet and graduate to using VS if that practice catches > on. This is designing Lojban to always be a second language. For the short-term, this is all that's realizable, but... it's depressing to use it as an *axiom*. But I'm willing to roll with your idea of 'graduating'. It is a short-term bridge to facilitate the long-term goal (the goal of getting rid of that axiom). And, in being optional from the beginning, it will live or die on its own merits. It seems a compromise that can work in short-term and long-term, if both sides are tolerant. > A big way in which auxlangs and loglangs differ from artlangs (such as > Tolkien or Klingon) is that idealism doesn't apply to artlangs. You > just ask the inventor of an artlang a question, and that settles it. > But in auxlangs/loglangs, the only standard against which to measure > success in its creation is reality itself, in which much less can ever > be dogmatically settled. So the participants, starting from a blank > slate, feel like they have a chance to create Perfection. This is > where they start quibbling over details and making mountains out of > molehills-- an endless pursuit of greater and greater perfection. Then > they are unable to speak to each other in their split-off variations > of the language. This ironically flies in the face of the nature and > purpose of language, as a participatory activity. Hmm. The only measure of success is reality itself. I'm not sure I can wrap my head around this; the implied meaning is that the only measure of success is *history*, and that, I disagree with. If there was *no* pursuit of perfection, there wouldn't even be the *beginning* of Lojban. Hm, that probably doesn't answer the point you're trying to make. Quibbling is inevitable. It is even desirable, so long as discourse remains civil and reasonable. It is how alternate ideas are tested for fitness. It's not always seen as a fair test by all the participants. (For my part, I'll try not to grumble too much.) I enjoy the intellectual stimulation I'm gaining from this discourse. I understand the very important distinction between phonetic and phonemic better now than I did before, I've seen even more writing methods that interest me, and even language concepts. Anyway, I'm into having a quibble now and then, it's fun. Hm, that still probably doesn't answer the point you're trying to make. I know I'm on a molehill. I am being loud, and vocal, because this molehill is smack in the middle of the entrance to one of the most beautiful lands I've known. Many people don't look this way, or take it for granted that it's a part of the landscape, probably *because* it's right at the entrance. If I make a mountain out of it, overshadow or crowd out other issues, tell me; I'll back off. But I *am* standing on a molehill, and I think it's a crying shame this smear is here, small as it is, when it doesn't have to be (or, at the very least, could be made smaller). Hm, I'm not sure even that's it. I don't want to get into a situation where I can't speak to others, or others can't speak to me. But I don't think I'm going in that direction. I think there is room to move in the direction of Perfection. I think it only right and proper to point this out, explain where necessary, and champion the cause. Lojban was a *major* move in the direction of Perfection, and many people now benefit from it. This move will be less benefit, but still, it will be benefit, in the long term, and it is still worthy, IMHO. Hm. Some, or all, or none of the above may or may not be relavent to what you wrote (or didn't write). Anyway. You can't accuse me of not using Lojban as a participatory activity! :) > Hence my stance toward the language I ultimately chose to learn, > Lojban, has been to embrace it -- warts and all -- because it's better > for my purposes than a language that doesn't even attempt its goals. > Consider that. I encourage you to adopt that attitude and you will be > happier and find more success. Many of us will enjoy using VS with > you, but it will never become the standard. I love Lojban! Even with its warts! Didn't I say that already? I love Lojban! I'll shout it from the hilltops: I love Lojban! I'll hire a skywriter to... well... no. ahem. :) Your consideration for my happiness is appreciated. But as I said, I'm having a good time here so far (mostly). I miss university, where I could participate in intellectual discussions fairly regularly. I occasionally trawl (not troll! - at least, I hope not!) the Internet for stimulating conversation. It's good for my brain. Your consideration for my success is also appreciated. But, as I said, I'm an idealist, I'd rather be good at what I do than successful. Thanks for your ideas, input, and concern, Matt. mi'e .xius. -- 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.