From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sun Apr 06 10:47:24 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 06 Apr 2008 10:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JiYxf-00081P-Ie for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 06 Apr 2008 10:47:23 -0700 Received: from smtp2.mail.rice.edu ([128.42.206.129] helo=mh2.mail.rice.edu) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JiYxW-00080a-5O for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 06 Apr 2008 10:47:22 -0700 Received: from mh2.mail.rice.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mh2.mail.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E175A36C7B6 for ; Sun, 6 Apr 2008 12:47:11 -0500 (CDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavis-2.4.4 at mh2.mail.rice.edu Received: from mh2.mail.rice.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by mh2.mail.rice.edu (mh2.mail.rice.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6lFqq5wK9oPi for ; Sun, 6 Apr 2008 12:47:11 -0500 (CDT) Received: from Starlight (student-109-mar142-108.rice.edu [10.109.142.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh2.mail.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9677736C8A6 for ; Sun, 6 Apr 2008 12:47:11 -0500 (CDT) From: "Marjorie Scherf" To: References: <597165.55778.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Subject: [lojban] Re: Original orthography draft now online for critique Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 12:44:53 -0500 Message-ID: <008301c8980d$ebe96f00$6c8e6d0a@Starlight> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <597165.55778.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: AciX9G79BDG/8jAxRhuMYj0WNo2fhQAFNgCQ X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Score-Int: -20 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-archive-position: 14309 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 I don't actually speak Farsi, but one of my friends from high school does, and she was showing me one time how to write the letters. (The standard, at least in Iran, is to use Arabic script.) I don't actually remember the letters, but I do remember that there are dots that differentiate some of the letters (which in informal handwriting, two dots above can be replaced with a line, and three dots above can be replaced with a circle) and that they are put in after the word is written. So those two "issues" are no worse than a common orthography for a common language. (And if the Arabic language uses the same features in it's orthography, which I would expect unless hearing otherwise, one of the word-ancestors of lojban.) Also, Farsi doesn't even use any letters for half their vowels, so this is actually clearer. On the other hand, it might be that most people here are more interested in "best possible" rather than "better than some existing thing". To those people, my previous paragraph would seem completely irrelevant. Now about the orthography itself, I think it looks beautiful. I see a common theme that all the letters in the chart have beginning and endings at the same height (except for the glottal stop symbols), making it appear that the alignment of the whole thing is based on the line (which again reminds me of the Arabic script) rather than based on writing things between lines (as is often done with Latin letters). I can't quite tell from the chart whether the top circle/loop in the p/b shape is supposed to be written as a loop in the same stroke or a circle to be added after the word is completed. One of those handwriting charts with the arrows that tells how to draw the letters might be helpful. (In second and third grade when I was learning cursive script, the teachers had those charts across the top of the chalkboard and smaller ones across the top of each student's desk. I don't know how common that is, if anyone else is going to have any idea what I'm talking about.) This point is more about the description, rather than the orthography itself: Reading your description in the "Notes" section, I'm not sure what you're referring to with the "stroke diacritic". When I look at letters that differ only by stop/fricative, I see no single diacritic that differs any of them. p/f look upside-down. k/x are completely different. t/s are completely different. The only mark I see on the chart at all that I could see being called a diacritic, other than the flick, is the slash-looking thing that differentiates s/c and z/j and '/x. But all of these sounds are fricatives. The difference between the pairs of sibilants appears to be differentiating between alveolar and post-alveolar, and the '/x would be between glottal and velar. But again, I see this as a modification to be made to the description, not the orthography. If we wanted to have every mark and stroke mean the same phonetic detail in every situation, a different orthographic style entirely would be needed. Which might be a fun exercise for someone who has the time, but that isn't something that has to be done to *this* orthography. Also, it might be easier for readers if on the non-cursive chart, you still include the latin letters they represent, so that they don't have to go back and forth as much between the two pages. If someone who knows how to design a font would make one for this orthography, I would probably use it. This would probably be easier to do with the not-cursive version, but that's just my intuition. I don't actually know anything about font design. mu'omi'e skaryzgik. -----Original Message----- From: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org [mailto:lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org] On Behalf Of John E Clifford Sent: Sunday, 06 April, 2008 9:40 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Original orthography draft now online for critique I'd say somewhere a bit above the middle of the range of proposals (a B of some sort -- roughly on a par with the Latin alphabet). Having to go back to dot the 'i's is a defect as is the fact that the use of diacritics for phoneme distinction increases the likelihood of misspellings and/or misreadings. That aside. the various symbols are fairly distinct, though perhaps unduly complex. It is unclear whether in a running hand the difference between a loop and a point will be maintained -- the misreading problem again. But it does look nice -- in a Thai-Armenian sort of way. ----- Original Message ---- From: LakMeer Kravid To: lojban-list@lojban.org Sent: Saturday, April 5, 2008 7:01:04 PM Subject: [lojban] Original orthography draft now online for critique My first draft has been uploaded to http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Original%20lojban%20orthograp hy Please comment and make suggestions, I'm open to drastic reformations. I'm also looking for a name for it. mu'o 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. ____________________________________________________________________________ ________ You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com 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. 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.