From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jul 11 14:11:46 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0PVg-0001fD-K1 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:12 -0700 Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.206]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0PVc-0001eq-VC for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:12 -0700 Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id m22so299551nzf for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:07 -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=Npc3fII9uTFbbObuX+nL9MVLJUB344LNQFxkmb3Ci7bL0R0BZAyFgAy4QHn5RodebzX1Ihxj/xqAKXrXoHg62umAgDXl/A4LjK0cdtfbxJ4HxvD54gvDdbkPlY27WWQjbiXohXcaQ1UydpD4i0EIDIwLNbbuJ8VONeJL0c3D8OM= Received: by 10.36.140.3 with SMTP id n3mr36348nzd; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.100? ( [70.224.74.45]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id c12sm2532405nzc.2006.07.11.14.11.07; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <44B41321.6050608@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 17:07:45 -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: Example of Cultural Neutrality References: <20060711030851.88782.qmail@web56404.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <44B39FC4.1030804@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 12119 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 Maxim Katcharov wrote: > All of this is already possible in Lojban. As I've said before, if the > intent is to let the reader speak it aloud, then the writer may very > well write it in IPA, or transliterate it into Lojban. Agreed. > If the intent > is to let the reader repeat it in writing, the writer will use the > native alphabet. If the intent is to allow both, then the writer can > write the native alphabet on top, with IPA directly below each word. Interesting idea; I hadn't thought of that. > To introduce a new alphabet, you need to show that the Latin alphabet > is deficient. To introduce a new alphabet to *replace* the Latin alphabet, I would need to show that the Latin alphabet is deficient. I do not intend replacement. > One deficiency could be that it doesn't allow you to > express many non-Lojban phonemes. If this is your argument, then you > need to show that it is a good idea to make the Lojbanist have to know > how to read and say the many, many phonemes that exist in order to > know Lojban. It is one of the arguments. However, I do not wish to *make* anyone have to know anything. The use of ZOI is for introducing non-Lojban into Lojban, so we're already talking about a subset of Lojbanists: those who want to use foreign words. For the purposes of global communication, one consistent symbol set, which can represent all spoken languages on Earth, is preferable to many symbol sets, some of which map the same symbol to different phonemes. Still; I do not propose banning native alphabets. This is to be a guideline to Lojbanists who wish to use the ZOI structure in a consistent way across many languages, not an ironclad rule. Didn't I say that already?? > The Latin alphabet is not deficient, and the Lojbanist > should not have to know more phonemes than Lojban currently has. In > addition, the problems that you point out are already solved as I've > described in the above paragraph. I don't think that you have a case. Again, it's not about 'have to know'. It's about facilitating consistent usage, for those who think (globally) consistent usage is a good idea. Every individual could consistently use an alphabet they think up out of their own heads. That's perfectly valid Lojban. It hinders communication, though. I could consistently use English text encrypted with a strong key inside every one of my ZOIs. That would be valid too. Why don't I? Because I want (as much as possible) more universal understanding, and easier use, of what I write. If *one* skill set will allow me to at least be an effective medium for *all* spoken languages, I think that's a good deal! But I'm not shoving it down your throat! The solution you propose above (native text with IPA beneath) is a pretty good one. The original text will not survive in its entirety through the written-to-spoken-to-written cycle performed by phoneticians who don't know the language, but enough will survive that a phonetician who *does* know the language will be able to reconstruct it again. I would place it alongside (perhaps even above, as a refinement of) my proposal. -- Good night, and have a rational tomorrow! 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.