From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Wed Jul 05 05:18:15 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 05 Jul 2006 05:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Fy6Jy-00064j-Ar for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 05:17:34 -0700 Received: from mx2.mail.ru ([194.67.23.122]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Fy6Jn-00064S-QK for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 05:17:29 -0700 Received: from [84.204.201.250] (port=2796 helo=[10.15.28.10]) by mx2.mail.ru with asmtp id 1Fy6Jl-000PnJ-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 16:17:21 +0400 Message-ID: <44ABADEA.7000504@mail.ru> Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 16:17:46 +0400 From: Dmitry User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Lojban alphabets References: <20060704213716.99746.qmail@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <44AB0A80.7040702@gmail.com> <925d17560607041853r23562af0xad7f31422c8369dd@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <925d17560607041853r23562af0xad7f31422c8369dd@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) X-archive-position: 11913 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ratson@mail.ru Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Jorge Llambías wrote: > Some thoughts on a featural alphabet for Lojban: > > 1- In principle, I like it as an idea. In practice, I don't see the > community > of Lojbanists adopting one in the short term, simply because it would > be too impractical to do so. This could actually be a good thing, as it Actually, I decided to restrain from this alphabet discussion, because it is not really related to Lojban. (In addition to that, reading such wordy letters in English makes me sleepy ^_^). Finally, that turned to be impossible. (Will shortage. Should meditate more). Let me point out one more problem with strict phonetic alphabet (whether it featural or not). Lojban allows a lot of freedom in pronunciation. Lerfu describes not the specific sound, but set of sounds, that are thought to be similar. And it is not a problem - it is essential feature of language, making it easier. With strict phonetic alphabet we should either device uniform pronunciation, or allow different variants of writing the same word. Both are problematic. PS Eww, I should better learn more gismu instead of continuing offtopic discussion... 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.