From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Wed Nov 08 20:34:52 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 08 Nov 2006 20:34:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Gi1cN-0002yq-SN for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 08 Nov 2006 20:34:26 -0800 Received: from f39.mail.ru ([194.67.57.77]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Gi1cB-0002yI-Mi for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 08 Nov 2006 20:34:21 -0800 Received: from mail by f39.mail.ru with local id 1Gi1c8-00079a-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:34:08 +0300 Received: from [212.17.0.61] by win.mail.ru with HTTP; Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:34:08 +0300 From: Yanis Batura To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: "la" in names Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: mPOP Web-Mail 2.19 X-Originating-IP: unknown via proxy [212.17.0.61] Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:34:08 +0300 In-Reply-To: =?windows-1251?Q?<20061109041814.GE23121=40chain.digitalkingdom.org>?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 12966 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ybatura@mail.ru Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list -----Original Message----- From: Robin Lee Powell To: lojban-list@lojban.org Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 20:18:14 -0800 Subject: [lojban] Re: "la" in names > > On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 06:40:28AM +0300, Yanis Batura wrote: > > I don't understand you, people. You are not at all confused by the > > fact that Lojban doesn't have VERY MANY sounds present in other > > languages, but the fact that you can't spell your name exactly as > > in English make you sick. > > > > Lojban doesn't allow {la}, {lai} and {doi} in names, and that's > > all. If even almost everyone, including me, of course, cannot > > adhere to this rule, that is our problem, and not the language's. > > Just wait, and the sence of correct lojbanization will develop in > > us. > > Not a single Lojbanist has *ever* internalized this rule. We know > this because *every* major Lojbanist has made this mistake, and it > showed up in "What Is Lojban?", which was proofread by at least 3 > major Lojbanists. > > We have no evidence, at all, that anyone can internalize this rule. > It's not about whether the rule is good or not. I don't mind in the > slightest that "la" isn't allowed; that's the least of what we have > to do to Lojbanize names. The problem is not what the rule > requires, the problem is that *we can't follow it*, and we've > *proven* we can't. Hmmm... From the logical point of view... Lojban is a bit pertaining to logic, isn't it?... Someone cannot *prove* that he cannot do something :) Proven can only be a fact that someone *can* do something, by doing that. I suggest that you use "shown" or "demonstrated" instead of "proven". I am absolutely sure that a native Lojban speaker will have the rule comfortly sitting in his/her brain. I am absolutely sure that given a good special training we will all internalize this rule. > A rule we can't follow that, in the not-following, breaks > audio-visual isomorphism is, to me, a total travesty of one of the > most important goals of the language. Whether someone gets to use > the "la" sound in their name or not is totally irrelevant to my > concerns. We're *breaking the language*, and it has to stop. Your suggestions? (sorry if I missed something back from 2005 :) mi'e .ianis 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.