From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Nov 01 04:53:17 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 73674 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2006 12:51:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m31.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Nov 2006 12:51:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Nov 2006 12:51:31 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GfFSt-0008Rk-Lz for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:45:08 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GfFQT-0008Nb-Dz; Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:42:46 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:42:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GfFPx-0008Mm-6x for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:42:05 -0800 Received: from smtp.mail.umich.edu ([141.211.93.161] helo=tombraider.mr.itd.umich.edu) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GfFPp-0008ME-BU for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:42:04 -0800 Received: FROM [141.213.221.81] (bursley-221-81.reshall.umich.edu [141.213.221.81]) BY tombraider.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 454895D6.95B89.3203 ; 1 Nov 2006 07:40:55 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) In-Reply-To: References: <70A00219-019E-42A6-96A1-5D8A347100A5@umich.edu> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-4--605945822 Message-Id: Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 07:40:47 -0500 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 12885 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: alexjm@umich.edu X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Alex Martini From: Alex Martini Reply-To: alexjm@umich.edu Subject: [lojban] Re: Stress of the penultimate syllable X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=BoVPJyUKTWJpd04Sx0mX1UOajDITUwuqliuJb98bv-nAsK5MyQ X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 27325 --Apple-Mail-4--605945822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed On Nov 1, 2006, at 5:11 AM, Andrii (lOkadin) Zvorygin wrote: > > > On 10/31/06, Alex Martini wrote: > u'u Yes, the dotted/spaceless style has a reason for accents. If > you can actually read and use it, I suppose it is technically correct. > > ki'u I was describing the variants that people actually *use*, > either in the corpus (the collection of published Lojban text) or > in this mailing list. To date, I've never seen anyone use this > style, except for special cases like {lonu} where they drop a non- > stopping space between two cmavo. > > I use it. OK - there is one user. But unless you can make some pretty good arguments, it's still harder to read and non-standard. The main issue with sticking majuscules (aka big letters or upper case) in the middle of text is that is messes with how we read. Fluent readers don't actually read letter by letter anymore, but by shape of the letter outlines. And all the vowels are normally shorter than a majuscule or an ascender (like h). So making them tall by capitalizing them means I can no longer read the text fluently, but have to slow down and look at individual letters like I did in elementary school again. Which is much slower. Is thIs tExt EAsier tO rEAd? I thInk nOt, becAUse yOU cannOt rEAd It At A nOrmal pAce bUt hAve to slOw dOwn. (It Also lOOks prEtty Ugly.) Try it, write out some text in English in all lower case, normal mixed case, accented case, and all upper case. The normal mixed case is what you've trained your brain to read best after years of near constant practice. It doesn't take kindly to messing that up. > > As for bandwidth/parsing advantages to the undotted style, I don't > really see them. The first step (an early step? not sure of > specifics) of parsing Lojban into structure *is* to find the word > boundaries. So if you use undotted, the parser just puts the spaces > back in anyhow. Check out either jbofi'e or the official DOS parser. > > I've actually made my own parser. > [ li'o ] Yes, but can it parse Lojban without finding word boundaries? --Apple-Mail-4--605945822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Nov 1, 2006, at 5:11 AM,= Andrii (lOkadin) Zvorygin wrote:



On 1= 0/31/06, Alex Martini <alexjm@umich.edu> wrote:
u'u Yes, the dot= ted/spaceless style has a reason for accents. If you can actually read and = use it, I suppose it is technically correct.

ki'u I= was=A0describing the variants that people actually *use*, either in the co= rpus (the collection of published Lojban text) or in this mailing list. To = date, I've never seen anyone use this style, except for special cases like = {lonu} where they drop a non-stopping space between two cmavo.
=

I use it.
OK - the= re is one user. But unless you can make some pretty good arguments, it's st= ill harder to read and non-standard.

The main issue with sticking=A0majuscules (aka big let= ters or upper case) in the middle of text is that is messes with how we rea= d. Fluent readers don't actually read letter by letter anymore, but by shap= e of the letter outlines. And all the vowels are normally shorter than a ma= juscule or an ascender (like h). So making them tall by capitalizing them m= eans I can no longer read the text fluently, but have to slow down and look= at individual letters like I did in elementary school again. Which is much= slower.

Is thIs= tExt EAsier tO rEAd? I thInk nOt, becAUse yOU cannOt rEAd It At A nOrmal p= Ace bUt hAve to slOw dOwn. (It Also lOOks prEtty Ugly.)

Try it, write out some text in Engl= ish in all lower case, normal mixed case, accented case, and all upper case= . The normal mixed case is what you've trained your brain to read best afte= r years of near constant practice. It doesn't take kindly to messing that u= p.

As for bandwid= th/parsing advantages to the undotted style, I don't really see them. The f= irst step (an early step? not sure of specifics) of parsing Lojban into str= ucture *is* to find the word boundaries. So if you use undotted, the parser= just puts the spaces back in anyhow. Check out either jbofi'e or the offic= ial DOS parser.

I've actually made = my own parser.
[ li'o ]

Yes, but can it parse Lojban without finding word= boundaries?

--Apple-Mail-4--605945822--