Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 94962 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2005 00:43:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m22.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2005 00:43:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Jan 2005 00:43:05 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1Clcmu-0002v9-58 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 03 Jan 2005 16:43:04 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ClcmM-0001Al-1o; Mon, 03 Jan 2005 16:42:30 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 03 Jan 2005 16:42:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from web51604.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.38.209]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Clcm5-0007vL-90 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2005 16:42:13 -0800 Received: (qmail 464 invoked by uid 60001); 4 Jan 2005 00:41:42 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=eAy7IT5PtGFc7eIAhexKHAnVophPcdF7xVKa7+PGfqC9IRs9ZpwY11bl/VTMUrRVTa5/EY5PLLA5wUUE6FW3HTBAwCpgQNOwJPGsQRMQRNu+D47X+vNffvmGJx5fOeInwHoX2e2LVoUFEThf0rn1TS1VGFFczQzu4bnQund87JE= ; Message-ID: <20050104004142.462.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [212.78.152.241] by web51604.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 03 Jan 2005 16:41:41 PST Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 16:41:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20050103234054.49431.qmail@web41907.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-archive-position: 9156 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jordimastrullenque@yahoo.com X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-From: jordi mas From: jordi mas Reply-To: jordimastrullenque@yahoo.com Subject: [lojban] Re: Lojban Lookup - program for Windows X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 23550 Content-Length: 1374 Lines: 53 > > Any of you guys sees any advantage to using ' > instead > > of h? (besides the clear conscience one gains when > > keeping to the ways of the forefathers, I mean) > > From the point of view of the morphology of Lojban, > the function of ' is very distinctive, it behaves > very differently from all the other consonants, so > it > makes sense to use a separate sign. Whether or not > this > compensates the problems this may cause to computers > is another matter. And of course there is the weight > of tradition too. That's a defense! Keep up the good work Jorge! Te defiendes como gato panza arriba! OK, OK, I'm OK with ' having on its favor the weight of tradition only. Traditions are important, they keep the feeling of unity of purpose and the cohesion of the tribe. I'm not against keeping the ' by taking into consideration social factors alone. Now a quiz. There are seven vowel sounds in modern Hindi. One of them behaves very differently from the other seven, from the point of view of the phonology of Hindi. Suppose we want to write Hindi with Roman letters. Should we use a letter to write that vowel? Or would some punctuation sign make more sense? Regards, --jordi ===== __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250