Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:16:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IaxuT-0004Uv-Ln for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:16:25 -0700 Received: from netscaler1.rice.edu ([128.42.205.5] helo=mh4.mail.rice.edu) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IaxuP-0004Ud-L0 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:16:25 -0700 Received: from mh4.mail.rice.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mh4.mail.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED8CC88124 for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:16:14 -0500 (CDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavis-2.4.4 at mh4.mail.rice.edu Received: from mh4.mail.rice.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by mh4.mail.rice.edu (mh4.mail.rice.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O5DqgKuSQlCs for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:16:06 -0500 (CDT) Received: from Starlight (student-109-mar142-225.rice.edu [10.109.142.225]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh4.mail.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 656F2881D5 for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:16:06 -0500 (CDT) From: "Marjorie Scherf" To: References: <00b901c8012d$77fcee40$e18e6d0a@Starlight> <12d58c160709271025t31569a42t8c6c20f0d7cd5555@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban] Re: What is lojbo? Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:13:45 -0600 Message-ID: <00c401c8013a$8a871a60$e18e6d0a@Starlight> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00C5_01C80108.3FECAA60" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 In-Reply-To: <12d58c160709271025t31569a42t8c6c20f0d7cd5555@mail.gmail.com> Thread-Index: AcgBK5ete/PjGI4YQXaniXzFS1f7qwADcu8g X-Spam-Score: 0.1 X-Spam-Score-Int: 1 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 13865 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: mls1@rice.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Content-Length: 9706 Lines: 339 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00C5_01C80108.3FECAA60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _____ From: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org [mailto:lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org] On Behalf Of komfo,amonan Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 11:25 AM To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: What is lojbo? On 9/27/07, Marjorie Scherf wrote: A discussion was started on the beginners list that seemed to fit better here. The question is whether something can be a Lojbanic way of talking about something if it uses non-Lojban letters. For example, saying {wybu} to talk about 'w'. It has been brought up that when talking to beginners, discussions of letters are usually done in English. But it would seem to me that if we're not worrying about Lojban names for things or Lojban ways to name them that it is pointless to use {bu} at all in these beginners' discussions. Things like {wybu} or its analogs {qybu} or {hybu} seem like inconsistent hybrids. But then, I've only been learning for a few months, and it is possible that there are years of precedents for this kind of thing that I missed. They don't parse. Non-lojbanic characters can only be expressed inside {la'o} and {zoi} quotes. Otherwise you have to use circumlocutions such as {y'y. bu} and those involving {lau} {zai} {tei}. I think the question, though, was more about whether it can be considered Lojbanic to say something like {wybu} in an English sentence. .i ebu cusku lu .i sepli mi'o le panoxa cibjmagutci fa la ke'avro .ije ma'a ponse lo culno me la betsis. me'u .e lo xadba culno tanxe be lo zgikrkazu'u .ije manku .ije mi'o dasni lo solri le'otci li'u .i jy. cusku lu ko .e mi klama li'u u'i i mi stidi lu le cibjmagutci be li pa no xa li'u i mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan ki'e .komfo,amonan. .imu'omi'e .skaryzgik. ------=_NextPart_000_00C5_01C80108.3FECAA60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

From: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org [mailto:lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org] = On Behalf Of komfo,amonan
Sent: Thursday, September = 27, 2007 11:25 AM
To: = lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: = What is lojbo?

 

On 9/27/07, Marjorie Scherf <mls1@rice.edu> wrote:

A discussion was started on the beginners list that = seemed to fit better here. The question is whether something can be a Lojbanic way = of talking about something if it uses non-Lojban letters. For example, = saying {wybu} to talk about 'w'. It has been brought up that when talking to beginners, discussions of letters are usually done in English. But it = would seem to me that if we're not worrying about Lojban names for things or = Lojban ways to name them that it is pointless to use {bu} at all in these = beginners' discussions. Things like {wybu} or its analogs {qybu} or {hybu} seem = like inconsistent hybrids. But then, I've only been learning for a few = months, and it is possible that there are years of precedents for this kind of thing = that I missed.


They don't parse. Non-lojbanic characters can only be expressed inside = {la'o} and {zoi} quotes. Otherwise you have to use circumlocutions such as = {y'y. bu} and those involving {lau} {zai} {tei}.

 

I think the question, though, was = more about whether it can be considered Lojbanic to say something like {wybu} = in an English sentence.

 

 

.i ebu cusku lu .i sepli mi'o le panoxa cibjmagutci fa la ke'avro .ije ma'a ponse lo culno me la betsis. me'u .e lo xadba culno = tanxe be lo zgikrkazu'u .ije manku .ije mi'o dasni lo solri le'otci li'u .i jy. = cusku lu ko .e mi klama li'u

u'i i mi stidi lu le cibjmagutci be li pa no xa li'u i mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan

 

ki’e = .komfo,amonan.

 

.imu’omi’e = .skaryzgik.

 


 

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_00C5_01C80108.3FECAA60-- 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.