From totus@rogers.com Sun Jan 03 16:50:02 2010 Received: from n75.bullet.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([98.136.44.51]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NRb8v-0001IA-Jr for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 03 Jan 2010 16:50:02 -0800 Received: from [216.252.122.217] by n75.bullet.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2010 00:49:51 -0000 Received: from [68.142.230.28] by t2.bullet.sp1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2010 00:49:51 -0000 Received: from [216.252.110.140] by t1.bullet.re2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2010 00:49:50 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp210.mail.re3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2010 00:49:50 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 862641.48595.bm@omp210.mail.re3.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 67027 invoked by uid 60001); 4 Jan 2010 00:49:50 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rogers.com; s=s1024; t=1262566190; bh=saHZoH+mZ7v1v3LhH4FbFtA84vb0glRTPFK1ODcpPyU=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=5X2r7xsa0puAXXPYISd8ojEfnVZGPvGm5rZ58uTcFHwih9QZPGUjPW8Az4aLEOHxz/yo8yTYo7yn3RPYjsyosAJLzouUh4tUlM4ucd4DLbzWAvs1GYgZ1s9OtKRdKnaHtPRl1bjO4IgtwLZY0+YGJVRPNbxvErVLeYe7ZfH+1NQ= DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=LPU+viwp33J8SrM1l9b3qOgHmfJ1TqksdFa4UVNsUthz7bYY8z8QS7e1S0FSuRYWHqN+tngnjiZTFisYLPtmMZ99kINMH1ZEGfdvdErxwJG+ejP07N6PlseI1MMQ+3U7IwCWsyKi5SXKbeJe0+MXyuRwNX4KCyBB91o3HHZlmkk=; Message-ID: <695389.67013.qm@web88002.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: L6qHkdgVM1km67qUIfNY7weMEJHoSMG6rzTvtyhI9QM3XEbACwz4S1N1lREVuRohSEn1C3ATj4IUb9afGBu91yg6qCwOfpV0Ixo.qQIYAF4L6Mbf288UZTyG.ahmYcbvJuc6uK.8PJWW_fI7Yibgt26krmCSMUms9IxcyMmFu3PeIU79VWFD.BbqsRo4iomyFLXxKYE6ktLM2on5339sLHCQ8OpQVi20SmE7j5tpkarSGAln_w_7qj6MGho4NIAgfQZJ9VFw6sTsqeegRd3NyIxFeFZGc7aNs88NyQn.OMjahUBwRczpGUJY Received: from [99.229.170.85] by web88002.mail.re2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 03 Jan 2010 16:49:50 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/240.3 YahooMailWebService/0.8.100.260964 References: <8CC5AA7171DCAE9-8FA8-1F578@webmail-d065.sysops.aol.com> <55b258c21001030921o36fa5cf6s2b1047ca0ddca20c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 16:49:50 -0800 (PST) From: "A. PIEKARSKI" Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Initial impression To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <55b258c21001030921o36fa5cf6s2b1047ca0ddca20c@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" - and so is ugliness. Lojban wasn't = designed =0Aas yet another Euro language.=A0 It's founders tried hard to ma= ke it cultutally neutral.=0A=0AYes, lojbanistan is currently populated main= ly by Europeans and North Americans.=0AIf we continue to make lojban sound = 'nice' to the current population of, at best, =0Aa few dozens, we may end u= p making it sound 'ugly' to thousands of other potential =0Alojbanists.=A0 = With respect, I think we should avoid subjective judgements about what =0As= ounds nice or ugly, and focus on the many other serious issues=A0that need = to=A0be resolved.=0A=0Amu'o mi'e andrus=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----= =0A> From: Craig Daniel =0A> To: lojban-list@lojban= ..org=0A> Sent: Sun, January 3, 2010 12:21:15 PM=0A> Subject: [lojban] Re: I= nitial impression=0A> =0A> On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Seth wrote:=0A>= >=0A> > 1. First, the usage of punctuation marks for pronounciation aides = is=0A> > confusing and looks simply ugly. Although this may sound subjectiv= e, the=0A> > development of our various alphabets has come a long way also = in the field=0A> > of aesthetics. Therefore I believe that many would agree= in an initial=0A> > judgment about a language that deliberately ruptures t= he image. Punctuation=0A> > ought to be reserved for marking various degree= s of breaks and pauses in the=0A> > flux of speech or thought - between wor= ds, not within. It adds structure to=0A> > written text to make it easier o= n the eye - remember how it came about, most=0A> > ancient and early mediev= al scripts did not use punctuation at all. Even if=0A> > this language uses= marker words in its stead, if you want it to be read by=0A> > humans and n= ot only by machines, you have to accomodate human perception to=0A> > a deg= ree. And the apostrophe represents an omission, either to indicate=0A> > sl= oppy speech, to facilitate rhythm keeping in poetry, or the like. All=0A> >= these identifications are preoccupied and not easily unlearned.=0A> =0A> T= here are three; I'll address them individually below. But personally=0A> I = think once you get used to it (which only took me about two weeks)=0A> they= 're really not so bad.=0A> =0A> > 2. If the apostrophe between vocals stand= s simply for a spoken 'h' sound,=0A> > what's the point of not using the 'h= ' proper, especially since it is=0A> > otherwise not used at all? The argum= ent of better visibility and greater=0A> > simplicity of the apostrophe is = quite subjective and I can't find myself=0A> > subscribing to it. In that c= ase, why such a privilege for the 'h' sound over=0A> > any other? Then a di= fferent alphabet should be developed with overall simper=0A> > graphics, th= at would facilitate faster handwriting and easier=0A> > recognizability tha= n the Roman letters. Shavian or Shorthand are examples of=0A> > such an end= eavour.=0A> =0A> The difference between that sound and others is that, for = purposes of=0A> morphology, it is neither a consonant nor a vowel, and in f= act=0A> morphologically acts like it's not there. Far from greater visibili= ty=0A> than an h, the apostrophe as one of the smallest marks it is possibl= e=0A> to make manages to make itself scarce in a way that IMO fits its role= =0A> quite nicely.=0A> =0A> Also, I don't really think of it as punctuation= ; lots of languages=0A> have apostrophes in the middle of words, and in man= y of them it is a=0A> consonant sound.=0A> =0A> > 3. Most irritating I find= the full stop at the beginning of a word to mark=0A> > the glottal stop wh= ere a word begins with a vocal. Most languages don't=0A> > write the glotta= l stop at all, but I assume there is a good reason for it=0A> > which I wil= l discover when reading on. Maltese is an exception to this, it=0A> > uses = the 'q' for the glottal stop. As this letter also has been otherwise=0A> > = disused for Lojban, it seems just perfect to fill the spot.=0A> =0A> Many p= eople treat periods as an optional formality, in part because=0A> they look= unpleasant to many of us. But we've found that the one in=0A> the word ".i= " in particular greatly improves readability - and, to be=0A> frank, ".i" i= s basically a punctuation mark anyway.=0A> =0A> My own opinion is that the = most legible lojban uses periods, while the=0A> most beautiful lojban does = not; I've done a little lojban calligraphy=0A> (...and I've been meaning to= post about this on the wiki and haven't=0A> done so) and normally eschew p= eriods there because they are=0A> unattractive - except that sometimes I in= clude the one in ".i"=0A> =0A> Also, a letter would be inappropriate for . = because it isn't a=0A> phoneme, but rather an allophonic rule about what vo= wels do at the=0A> start of words. One of the key principles of Lojban orth= ography is a=0A> single phoneme per letter.=0A> =0A> > 4. Same goes for the= comma in the middle of the word to separate vocals that=0A> > do not form = a diphtong. Again the 'q' would seem perfect in its place. This=0A> > would= introduce different pronounciation rules for the 'q' depending on its=0A> = > position, but sufficiently simple and unambiguous.=0A> =0A> The comma is = very ugly, and really ought to be avoided. It's only=0A> found in names, an= d only those names that are sufficiently=0A> un-lojbanified to need it; the= re seems to be an unstated sense that=0A> "properly" lojbanizing your name = includes making it work without=0A> commas, probably because you and I are = far from alone in disliking=0A> them.=0A> =0A> To me the comma is an un-lob= ykai equivalent of including foreign=0A> diacritics in English names or w's= in Spanish, both of which are=0A> slightly jarring to come across. Suffici= ently assimilated foreigners=0A> in English-speaking lands nearly always dr= op their diacritics, and=0A> when Spanish absorbs a word completely enough = the spelling shifts=0A> (hence "el v=E1ter" as the modern spelling of the w= ord borrowed and=0A> clipped from English "water closet"). Its inclusion in= a word=0A> instantly marks the word as being outside of the Lojban languag= e, and=0A> has little bearing on the aesthetics of proper Lojban.=0A> =0A> = > 5. The forced adding of an 's' (or at least any consonant, if I understan= d=0A> > correctly) to transliterated names that end on a vocal comes across= to me=0A> > almost as an act of violence against a sacrosanct name, I find= it disturbing=0A> > at best. Yet again the 'q' seems the ideal fit for the= purpose of fulfilling=0A> > the rule that it must end on a consonant. It w= ould not alter the sound of=0A> > the spoken name, since it would remain si= lent as the glottal stop at the end=0A> > of a word is not pronounced (hard= ly doable at all). (Could this possibly=0A> > create ambiguity in spoken la= nguage?)=0A> =0A> All names have to fit Lojbanic phonotactics already, so t= hey cannot be=0A> used as is (short of saying "la'o .zoi. This is a name th= at you can't=0A> say in Lojban .zoi."). As for whether allowing names to en= d in vowels=0A> could create ambiguity, the answer is yes. This ambiguity c= ould be=0A> prevented by putting constraints on names like those on type-4 = fu'ivla=0A> (heck, we could have our names *be* type-4 fu'ivla, so that=0A>= "kreigdane" means "x1 is Craig Daniel" or something), but this would=0A> b= e worse - it would require all names to end in a vowel, so it=0A> wouldn't = really solve the problem, and it would put even greater=0A> constraints on = their shapes. Also, the slinku'i test (the test to make=0A> sure putting a = cmavo in front of a type-4 fu'ivla won't cause=0A> ambiguity) is a little t= ricky, and since the first thing most people=0A> do is Lojbanize their name= s, it's a good thing we don't insist on this=0A> from every novice.=0A> =0A= > As for a silent consonant or a glottal stop, Lojban's goals as a=0A> lang= uage would be betrayed by the breakdown of audiovisual isomorphism=0A> requ= ired for the former, and the latter would require a different=0A> phonology= , one in which the glottal stop was a phoneme like any other=0A> - which it= isn't precisely because, as you note, there are many times=0A> when it's d= ifficult to pronounce.=0A> =0A> > But these issues are honestly just pristi= ne feedback aimed at only serving=0A> > the course. I am not aware of other= s having expressed similar or contrary=0A> > thoughts. All in all, I can on= ly laud this project and its creators, wishing=0A> > you great success in t= he coming year, decade, and beyond.=0A> =0A> Welcome!=0A> =0A> In time I'm = sure you'll find that the language has its quirks, and=0A> everyone's got o= ne or two that bug them, but it's great fun anyhow.=0A> =0A> mi'e .kreig.da= niyl.=0A> =0A> =0A> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list= -request@lojban.org=0A> with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.l= ojban.org/lsg2/, or if=0A> you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojb= an.org for help.=0A