From lojban-out@lojban.org Fri Dec 16 19:46:17 2005 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 53377 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2005 03:46:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m25.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 17 Dec 2005 03:46:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 03:46:16 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EnT1S-0002FV-Vz for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:46:15 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1EnT0E-0002EW-3u; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:45:00 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:44:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EnSzp-0002EN-1E for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:44:33 -0800 Received: from mx1.mail.ru ([194.67.23.121]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1EnSzk-0002EG-Sb for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:44:32 -0800 Received: from [212.17.3.19] (port=1075 helo=yanis.vpn.plhs) by mx1.mail.ru with esmtp id 1EnSzi-000D9P-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 06:44:27 +0300 Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 09:44:24 +0600 X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.5.30) Professional X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <847037620.20051217094424@mail.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------6C1C81BE45C2E03" X-Spam-Score: -2.1 (--) X-archive-position: 10922 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ybatura@mail.ru X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.1 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Yanis Batura From: Yanis Batura Reply-To: ybatura@mail.ru Subject: [lojban] Chess-and-Tetris Hypothesis X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=YYrigl67gH0CWdUEVxuvVhxZOSUsUCiGexq9gIf5-TEbUk8ocw X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 25318 ------------6C1C81BE45C2E03 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hereby I describe my hypothesis about speaking Lojban (goi ko'a), called "The Chess-and-Tetris hypothesis", name derivation below. 0. The worst way of translation to ko'a from English is literal translation, condemned as {malglico}: http://arj.nvg.org/lojban/malglico.html (may be outdated) The most sad about ko'a, which concerns everybody unless we have a native ko'a speaker, is that by years of learning and practicing ko'a and becoming more or less familiar with many typical ko'a words/phrases, your brain gets accustomed to these templates and begins refusing to think. And thinking is *always required* to speak ko'a, alas, even if you speak ko'a for years. If you are NOT thinking while speaking ko'a, being at the same time a native speaker of other language, you are rolling down to {malglico}. Or {maldotco}. Or {malrusko}. That is NOT ko'a, actually, that is a near-ko'a substance which doesn't deserve any interest and may be called {malylojbo} as well. If speaking {malylojbo}, why don't simply speak Esperanto then? 1. Chess and Tetris. I believe many of you have played both games at least several times. Fact: after 1 day of playing Tetris you won't have to think while playing it anymore. Fact: even if you play chess everyday for all your life, you will always have to think while playing it. 2. Natural-type languages and ko'a. Natural-type languages are, firstly, natural languages, and secondly, constructed languages with grammars similar to those of natural languages. Esperanto is, e.g., a natural-type language. In a natural-type language words do not have exact/explicit/formal relation with other words in the sentence. Ko'a is, obviously, a constructed but not natural-type language. Fact: after 10 (or usually less) years of learning and practicing a foreign natural-type language you won't have to think while speaking it. Hypothesis 1: Expression of implicit relation between words in a sentence, relying on a context, the feature of natural-language texts, doesn't require thinking. Hypothesis 2: Explicit, hierarchical, formula-like expression of relations between words in sentences requires thinking and doesn't get accustomed to. HYPOTHESIS 3 (Chess-and-Tetris hypothesis): THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NATURAL-TYPE LANGUAGES AND NON-NATURAL-TYPE LANGUAGES LIKE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TETRIS AND CHESS. HUMAN BRAIN WILL NEVER GET ACCUSTOMED TO NON-NATURAL-TYPE LANGUAGES TO THE GRADE WHEN IT WON'T THINK WHILE SPEAKING THEM. 3. Sapir-Whorf. Hypothesis 4: Sapir-Whorf hypothesis cannot be applied to all languages. It can be applied to natural-type languages, or the languages not requiring thinking while speaking, only. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS: 1. You must ALWAYS think while speaking Lojban (which is not required for natural languages), otherwise you speak not "a real Lojban" but {malglico/maldotco/malfraso/...}. 2. You will never feel any form of "magical effects of Sapir-Whorf hypothesis" while speaking Lojban since it's not applicable to Lojban. 3 (reformulating 1). You will ALWAYS have to think while speaking Lojban, like playing chess. 4. Many people don't like chess because chess require thinking. For the same reason, many people will dislike Lojban. 5. Thinking tires brain. Constant thinking depletes brain resources. Lojban requires thinking. mi'e .ianis. ------------6C1C81BE45C2E03 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hereby I describe my hypothesis about speaking Lojban (goi ko'a), called "The Chess-and-Tetris hypothesis", name derivation below.


0. The worst way of translation to ko'a from English is literal translation, condemned as {malglico}: http://arj.nvg.org/lojban/malglico.html (may be outdated)


The most sad about ko'a, which concerns everybody unless we have a native ko'a speaker, is that by years of learning and practicing ko'a and becoming more or less familiar with many typical ko'a words/phrases, your brain gets accustomed to these templates and begins refusing to think. And thinking is *always required* to speak ko'a, alas, even if you speak ko'a for years. If you are NOT thinking while speaking ko'a, being at the same time a native speaker of other language, you are rolling down to {malglico}. Or {maldotco}. Or {malrusko}. That is NOT ko'a, actually, that is a near-ko'a substance which doesn't deserve any interest and may be called {malylojbo} as well. If speaking {malylojbo}, why don't simply speak Esperanto then?


1. Chess and Tetris. I believe many of you have played both games at least several times.

Fact: after 1 day of playing Tetris you won't have to think while playing it anymore.

Fact: even if you play chess everyday for all your life, you will always have to think while playing it.


2. Natural-type languages and ko'a. Natural-type languages are, firstly, natural languages, and secondly, constructed languages with grammars similar to those of natural languages. Esperanto is, e.g., a natural-type language. In a natural-type language words do not have exact/explicit/formal relation with other words in the sentence. Ko'a is, obviously, a constructed but not natural-type language. 

Fact: after 10 (or usually less) years of learning and practicing a foreign natural-type language you won't have to think while speaking it.


Hypothesis 1: Expression of implicit relation between words in a sentence, relying on a context, the feature of natural-language texts, doesn't require thinking.


Hypothesis 2: Explicit, hierarchical, formula-like expression of relations between words in sentences requires thinking and doesn't get accustomed to.


HYPOTHESIS 3 (Chess-and-Tetris hypothesis): THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NATURAL-TYPE LANGUAGES AND NON-NATURAL-TYPE LANGUAGES LIKE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TETRIS AND CHESS. HUMAN BRAIN WILL NEVER GET ACCUSTOMED TO NON-NATURAL-TYPE LANGUAGES TO THE GRADE WHEN IT WON'T THINK WHILE SPEAKING THEM.


3. Sapir-Whorf.

Hypothesis 4: Sapir-Whorf hypothesis cannot be applied to all languages. It can be applied to natural-type languages, or the languages not requiring thinking while speaking, only.


SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS:

1. You must ALWAYS think while speaking Lojban (which is not required for natural languages), otherwise you speak not "a real Lojban" but {malglico/maldotco/malfraso/...}.

2. You will never feel any form of "magical effects of Sapir-Whorf hypothesis" while speaking Lojban since it's not applicable to Lojban.

3 (reformulating 1). You will ALWAYS have to think while speaking Lojban, like playing chess. 

4. Many people don't like chess because chess require thinking. For the same reason, many people will dislike Lojban.

5. Thinking tires brain. Constant thinking depletes brain resources. Lojban requires thinking.



mi'e .ianis.



------------6C1C81BE45C2E03--