From pycyn@aol.com Mon Jan 28 06:49:48 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 28 Jan 2002 14:49:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 31686 invoked from network); 28 Jan 2002 14:49:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m4.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Jan 2002 14:49:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r05.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.101) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Jan 2002 14:49:47 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.26.) id r.84.2259c2f2 (17381) for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:49:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <84.2259c2f2.2986bf00@aol.com> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:49:36 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Bible translation style question To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_84.2259c2f2.2986bf00_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 13063 --part1_84.2259c2f2.2986bf00_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/28/2002 7:35:51 AM Central Standard Time, ragnarok@pobox.com writes: > Lojban is already quite SAE. There is no way that you are going to tell me > that it is oligosynthetic, which if I understand Whorf right is the other > alternative. Furthermore, it distinguishes past, present, and future tenses > (as opposed to Hopi, for example, which has past+present material things > versus future+present immaterial things) > Oligosyntetic is not the only alternative, just the one that Whorf had the most experience with -- it's fairly common in American Indian languages ("oligosynthetic" presupposes "polysynthetic."). Of course, that depends on what your definition of "SAE" is as well -- is it necessarily toward the isolating end of that particular spectrum (is Chinese, as the example of maximum isolation -- among natural languages, many artificial go beyond it -- closer to SAE than Mennominee (SP!), say)? Is tense significant? -- having it obligatory or optional is presumed to be, but the pattern may not be. Ditto singular, dual, trial, plural. --part1_84.2259c2f2.2986bf00_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/28/2002 7:35:51 AM Central Standard Time, ragnarok@pobox.com writes:


Lojban is already quite SAE. There is no way that you are going to tell me
that it is oligosynthetic, which if I understand Whorf right is the other
alternative. Furthermore, it distinguishes past, present, and future tenses
(as opposed to Hopi, for example, which has past+present material things
versus future+present immaterial things)


Oligosyntetic is not the only alternative, just the one that Whorf had the most experience with -- it's fairly common in American Indian languages ("oligosynthetic" presupposes "polysynthetic.").  Of course, that depends on what your definition of "SAE" is as well -- is it necessarily toward the isolating end of that particular spectrum (is Chinese, as the example of maximum isolation -- among natural languages, many artificial go beyond it -- closer to SAE than Mennominee (SP!), say)?  Is tense significant?  -- having it obligatory or optional is presumed to be, but the pattern may not be.  Ditto singular, dual, trial, plural.  --part1_84.2259c2f2.2986bf00_boundary--