From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jul 11 14:26:17 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:26:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0Pjy-0001xx-Pw for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:25:58 -0700 Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.196]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0Pjy-0001xp-0B for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:25:58 -0700 Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id m22so301108nzf for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:25:57 -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=Uq/G84ZVx/rnbvoArcjwuZNU5UYyzrSMZ2E5THpXsjrPP3BzIE1JxscBU3tVYCs6bCYR0SVEYwcvIRA6kMZTXjLpXboaifPXGxgxM7wPkkdQmWTrrXghanjmCjvw7UVi2ECfvLuk+1hMIANjUaSvjetSJgEOr5i808dbdKmIMYg= Received: by 10.36.74.5 with SMTP id w5mr27720nza; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.100? ( [70.224.74.45]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id 37sm44799nzf.2006.07.11.14.25.55; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <44B41699.4080508@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 17:22:33 -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: ZOI and culture neutrality References: <44AF0325.2070709@gmail.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: 12120 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 One particular point jumped out at me from this post... Maxim Katcharov wrote: > It is expected that the biologist would know what is in those la'o > quotes, just as the linguist would know the IPA, or as the layman know > the simple transliteration-into-Lojban. These ZOI are specifically > intended for any case where the audience is expected to be interested > in the non-Lojban. Good point, good point. Lojban does not specify kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus and species classifications; it leaves that to the experts in the relavent field (biology). But then, Lojban doesn't have any particular structure in place for making distinctions in biology. It does have the ZOI structure for other languages, *all* other languages. It seems only appropriate to take advantage of the expertise of those whose field of study is, *all* spoken languages, to make ZOI as complete as it can be. A bit rushed now, but I liked that point and wanted to respond. -- 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.