From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat Jul 08 07:18:26 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 08 Jul 2006 07:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FzDd6-0001O1-2H for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 07:17:56 -0700 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.191]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FzDcz-0001Nt-FB for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 07:17:53 -0700 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id b2so189914nfe for ; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 07:17:47 -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:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=C6xRxNYru81Ij5UvJNQfQaN5zKYcdmVrkSwplkb7GYHTBbw5Q6fD8wiUKWd/ijNX0AkIYqjRCfVqZ6TbLw9HJ1mlh9uLAHiFUoY1X95rkSn5ETnR4OukPRvYPCVbmEhcj1T9KNCuBUbYU6+Qs0f4nEVSnONSYFStOr/FRNvr7jE= Received: by 10.78.177.3 with SMTP id z3mr1114000hue; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 07:17:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.78.121.7 with HTTP; Sat, 8 Jul 2006 07:17:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 10:17:47 -0400 From: "Matt Arnold" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: ZOI and culture neutrality In-Reply-To: <44AF0325.2070709@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <44AF0325.2070709@gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 11980 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: matt.mattarn@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On 7/7/06, Hugh O'Byrne wrote: > Background: > > Lojban has a structure, the ZOI selma'o (CLL page 477). Within written > Lojban, it provides a means of using an alternate orthography. This is > advantageous, in that people who are familiar with alternate > orthographies are free to use them if they wish. Within spoken Lojban, > ZOI provides a means of distinguishing two words which not homophones, > in their native language, but that when mapped onto the Lojban phonemes, > would effectively become homophones. This is advantageous in that > needless ambiguity is not enforced upon expressing foreign words in Lojban. > > Observation: > > Orthographies and phonemes are tied to culture. Lojban is intended to > be culture-neutral (CLL page 3). Subtle loopholes arise. > > In writing a Lojban text, a Lojbanist familiar with an alternate > orthography can choose to use it to make his job easier (e.g. by using > the text "la'o dy. Goethe .dy."). In some cases, e.g. if he wishes to > use a particular foreign word that either uses a sound not native to > Lojban, or would be needlessly ambiguated as described above, the writer > *must* use ZOI. > > Loophole one: Ideally, the writer (if he has taken enough care) should > be able to give his text to *any* other Lojbanist, even one with *no* > cultural (specifically, orthographic) knowledge outside of Lojban > itself, and that second Lojbanist should be able to read aloud the text > flawlessly. This is not the case with the current system. I disagree. I believe it is the case with the current system. Your email is predicated on the idea that zoi and {la'o] transform the word "Goethe" into a Lojban word, and therefore there is a Lojban word that not everyone knows how to pronounce. That is not the case. "Goethe" is not Lojban, even when it is included in the correct Lojban text "la'o .dy. Goethe .dy." Such functions are inserting non-Lojban into Lojban. Lojban speakers should always have the freedom to insert non-Lojban. Lojban is a language that makes a lot of sense, and yet it allows you to speak complete nonsense as much as you wish. It is an unambigious language which allows you to speak as ambiguously as you wish. It is also a consistent language that allows you to insert inconsistencies in the way that you have just pointed out. These freedoms are features, not bugs. The freedom to insert various cultures into a culturally-neutral language is identical to the way that religious neutrality allows us the freedom to practice any religion we wish, by not mandating any one of them. Multicultural racial neutrality in our society allows a variety of cultures and ethnicities, by not mandating any one of them. Lojban has words that open and close a string of text which would, without those bracket words, be "rule-breaking" text. Lojban does not force you to use those words. The measures you propose would mandate one all-consuming, monolithic, heterogenous Lojban culture to replace all other cultures. -epkat 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.