From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Jul 10 11:18:27 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:18:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G00Ke-00057V-IX for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:18:08 -0700 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.182]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G00Kd-00057M-BP for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:18:08 -0700 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id i49so1314788pyi for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:18:06 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Qu2euMuqFvOqbJY139j7U7j/dfHXpxNCnubwnrVXLUAP1uw0j8FEtlztA/jfog5gS9/IaEh7pPWJNfDEQU5GKx9AHlbXwQMtcr3/LZ5yB0gxE4XPNSrFawgt7l+65S18vSJqgeOhD+ildIsyJldhQjnpfbC9AxT4Zk1D/YmN39c= Received: by 10.35.100.6 with SMTP id c6mr5324004pym; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.39.7 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:18:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:18:05 -0600 From: "Maxim Katcharov" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: ZOI and culture neutrality In-Reply-To: <44AF0325.2070709@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <44AF0325.2070709@gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 12067 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: maxim.katcharov@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On 7/7/06, Hugh O'Byrne wrote: > [...] (Pardon me if I've missed any arguments.) I disagree with the argument that supports changes. The stuff between zoi quotes isn't Lojban, so the Lojban-speaker isn't expected to pronounce it in the first place. It is not directed at them, but at one who is interested in the other-language. The writer/speaker will do different things based on intent. If the intent is to provide a perfect explanation of how to pronounce something in Arabic, then the written version of that Arabic will be written in IPA. Another option is to transliterate it into Lojban. If the intent is to show the writing system, then it will be written in Arabic (obviously not spoken). Some non-Lojbanic writing will be clearer to the Lojbanist than the Lojban versions, so those can be included with la'o (which is used only for names. It may help to imagine something like Goethe being like that symbol for Prince). 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. The solution to "Goethe" is to just use {la gytes} (or what have you). Myself, I'd prefer to write it as CLL does. I think that it's easier to understand that way. 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.