From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Nov 09 21:46:34 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 09 Nov 2006 21:46:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GiPDS-0005Tt-R4 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 09 Nov 2006 21:46:15 -0800 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.173]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GiPDN-0005Tm-Nx for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 09 Nov 2006 21:46:14 -0800 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id c2so418130ugf for ; Thu, 09 Nov 2006 21:46:08 -0800 (PST) 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:references; b=e3hdtk4VewLF+D8ZMrdaM81UL/QUvSEv/iMks6MWSA1lBRoJZwtiBdjmV8fW7pRLoLcH4SEtLL7YOyEMTjwc3WEdDG2B+kWMxCY1NS2AgLAWiFHsDkFpE4CSz4zbQNV3eB+SIUqwz79ZyrD9PvRYxDZsDK1T0KIuUZ5eIQ1lMr0= Received: by 10.67.93.6 with SMTP id v6mr2818724ugl.1163137568256; Thu, 09 Nov 2006 21:46:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.216.14 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Nov 2006 21:46:08 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 00:46:08 -0500 From: "Hugh O'Byrne" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: D'ni orthography for Lojban In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_32991_13783918.1163137568212" References: <20061108175325.GQ32108@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <118344.47285.qm@web30401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <89189913.20061110065110@mail.ru> X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 13028 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: hobyrne@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list ------=_Part_32991_13783918.1163137568212 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On 11/10/06, Hugh O'Byrne wrote: > > It is good there are only two different types of feature you have to go > back and do after scribbling the 'main' line of the word - the vertical > bars, and the short horizontal ticks (like dotting 'i's and crossing 't's); > any more than two features, I feel, may be unappealing. Oops, I spoke too soon. 'l' and 'n' need different types of vertical bar to distinguish them. When I go back to fill in features of a word, my mind is already moving on the next word; the distinction between 'l' and 'n' looks subtle enough that I suspect my brain may have to stutter back to be sure to make the right type of line, interrupting flow of thought. I haven't actually tried it, and after I've trained in this alphabet, I may not even consciously notice that I'm writing two different types of vertical bar, but, in my mind, I imagine it being a niggling imp in the back of my brain. I stated that it's good there are few features you have to go back for; in my ideal orthography, you'd never have to go back over what you've written. But, this may come at the cost of making the symbols overly large, and perhaps there are benefits to having to 'stutter' - it may keep your thoughts from drifting away, which would be easier if you never had to go back on what you're writing. So, there are issues other than my opinion I would recommend you to consider before making a decision. But, for what it's worth, that's my opinion. mi'e .xius. -- Good night, and have a rational tomorrow! ------=_Part_32991_13783918.1163137568212 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
On 11/10/06, Hugh O'Byrne <hobyrne@gmail.com> wrote:
It is good there are only two different types of feature you have to go back and do after scribbling the 'main' line of the word - the vertical bars, and the short horizontal ticks (like dotting 'i's and crossing 't's); any more than two features, I feel, may be unappealing.

Oops, I spoke too soon.  'l' and 'n' need different types of vertical bar to distinguish them.  When I go back to fill in features of a word, my mind is already moving on the next word; the distinction between 'l' and 'n' looks subtle enough that I suspect my brain may have to stutter back to be sure to make the right type of line, interrupting flow of thought.  I haven't actually tried it, and after I've trained in this alphabet, I may not even consciously notice that I'm writing two different types of vertical bar, but, in my mind, I imagine it being a niggling imp in the back of my brain.

I stated that it's good there are few features you have to go back for; in my ideal orthography, you'd never have to go back over what you've written.  But, this may come at the cost of making the symbols overly large, and perhaps there are benefits to having to 'stutter' - it may keep your thoughts from drifting away, which would be easier if you never had to go back on what you're writing.  So, there are issues other than my opinion I would recommend you to consider before making a decision.  But, for what it's worth, that's my opinion.

mi'e .xius.
--
Good night, and have a rational tomorrow!

 ------=_Part_32991_13783918.1163137568212-- 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.