From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Jul 10 12:04:08 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:04:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G012b-00062n-TO for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:03:34 -0700 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.183]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G012V-00061R-MS for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:03:29 -0700 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id i49so1327599pyi for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:03:22 -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=iVocUSbVyXclsQPigZPV+Qv1zlorfAsFuq+WZEwE+wA9Ci3NcpXEI+LPA2Eu+ylApwo4v7D1I6LBGBRnpKAr10erS3YVZPN3aGuWOvThYphRKbi8hB9Jnyf079JUxlW5XwYPcxYmlslMM2T9JB7Ozbaj9WSwKNRtN2w2x5hIfTc= Received: by 10.35.34.18 with SMTP id m18mr5373704pyj; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.39.7 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 13:03:22 -0600 From: "Maxim Katcharov" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Alphabet proposal one. In-Reply-To: <44B21C12.5060806@bilkent.edu.tr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <44AD673B.7060501@gmail.com> <925d17560607061651p19623e56x7c188368533f9c48@mail.gmail.com> <20060706235433.GJ18983@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <2d3df92a0607081047i5ba3e2b5ucf79eaf3bed81d4a@mail.gmail.com> <44B21C12.5060806@bilkent.edu.tr> X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 12068 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: maxim.katcharov@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On 7/10/06, robin wrote: > HeliodoR wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 08:51:09PM -0300, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > > > > If the CLL or the BPFK ever come to treat the question, my vote > > > > will be for it not to declare any alphabet official, since I don't > > > > really see the point of having an official alphabet. > > > > > > That would be my inclination as well. > > > > And mine. I tend to think that the "Usage will determine" plays into > > this well. > > > > > > i'e > > I share this opinion too. > > .i'e I also think that in terms of cultural neutrality, "Use whichever > alphabet you want" is about as neutral as you can get! > > robin.tr > I disagree for numerous reasons. "Use whichever phonemes or words that you want" is about as neutral as you can get in those respective domains, but it's still a stupid idea (the character-set being analogous to the phoneme-set or word-set). There should not be two or more competing alphabets - and soon enough there would be (assuming the community didn't support an "official" unofficial alphabet). One shouldn't be expected to learn several phonetic alphabets in order to communicate with other writers, especially with things such as the Cyrillic vs Latin P (/r/ vs /p/). Latin is the most-used system in the world, and so a modified version of it makes the most sense. It's as if someone is going to be sore that their alphabet was excluded, "you should have used one letter from each alphabet, like the gismu!". Just like German or French weren't used in making the gismu, it wasn't considered prudent to use many alphabets in the language. This sort of "culture neutrality" is ridiculous. Having the language pronounceable by the majority of people, not using certain metaphors ("I'm feeling down"), not basing the word-set on one relatively small language - these things are important. A new alphabet takes a few hours to learn for anyone who doesn't know it, it's trivial. Yet each of you want to I suppose 'diversify' the language by not specifying an official alphabet? I'm confused, and think that I may have missed something here. Regarding the alphabet proposal, if Lojban were to take on another official alphabet (besides, er, ASCII), I would hope that it is the IPA, and not something that, frankly and unfortunately, looks goofy (which is true of any non-standard alphabet used in a constructed language). If anyone has a complaint with how hard it is to write (I would type it regardless, so I have none), suggest that alternate forms be added to the IPA. 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.