From 3ogSySwsJBqQPYOIEFIVKIRKQEMP.GSQPSNFERKSSKPIKVSYTW.GSQ@groups.bounces.google.com Tue Mar 30 07:03:41 2010 Received: from mail-vw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3ogSySwsJBqQPYOIEFIVKIRKQEMP.GSQPSNFERKSSKPIKVSYTW.GSQ@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1Nwc2T-00070k-T4 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:40 -0700 Received: by mail-vw0-f61.google.com with SMTP id 3sf4475681vws.16 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:date:received:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=MVAa/ZT5R8HxCpSqkYUYsApqheNl0abIGN83Qg7wO1w=; b=g9IyzzMh2EGttNgyeTbCZm3PL+SxexnA7FopES6wtoPnykMyjAEpwgxyMo6PEi0fj0 EL+eFKpf+q0BNpOOdUDr/Mh5971k7yoUE6UVA/bhQ3ofSz3Le8aW6wZmUMz0md350yIc P01ukm1QzrKdmI4gv1AEhRFgljDJCgnGfclcc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=kv2XYlwyCBDyGbRtyldva+iFNwGFRu4uifuUEQKZNT37K9RC97+k8KXuyNWFbvQ6GR Gi93nQIIVah1AMaCQzB7vaT5ltG4b0sdpwrjM/mVM0Vyt2xl7j1qd4JkWsclCeTtb1M5 P25jwVR339q0krZMtJbcGWGvY7hkvA/qiz9Ww= Received: by 10.220.127.34 with SMTP id e34mr645660vcs.2.1269957794332; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:14 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.220.87.130 with SMTP id w2ls2747251vcl.4.p; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.159.13 with SMTP id h13mr1618922vcx.0.1269957793368; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.159.13 with SMTP id h13mr1618920vcx.0.1269957793317; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f42.google.com (mail-vw0-f42.google.com [209.85.212.42]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 25si13490786vws.0.2010.03.30.07.03.12; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:12 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.42 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.42; Received: by mail-vw0-f42.google.com with SMTP id 18so3575182vws.29 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.97.206 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4BB20330.6030403@gmail.com> References: <4BB0D4DF.2070501@gmail.com> <5715b9301003291146h66475c74off6625befee8fdf5@mail.gmail.com> <8EE07369-765A-49AB-AEC4-1DEC1A904C37@gmail.com> <20100330090253.GG3000@nvg.org> <59C6A282-0F28-4016-98C7-907FBD3C4379@gmail.com> <4BB20330.6030403@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:03:11 -0400 Received: by 10.220.4.21 with SMTP id 21mr682280vcp.102.1269957792020; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:03:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5715b9301003300703h3a6a3d56t55d59cc18bd01d46@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] la .alis. From: Luke Bergen To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: X-Thread-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/t/62f96e395a91e500 X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/93d4cd741d11d56e Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001517576cb212b8580483051730 --001517576cb212b8580483051730 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 And I still don't understand what you stand to gain from changing things to make them suit your tastes. I get a mental picture of you looking through your many translations of alice and seeing them all use the same typography but having no freaking clue what the words actually say. I don't mean to sound mean, but it kind of sounds like someone coming over to my house and drawing mustaches on all the art on my walls because "it's more common for males from this period to have mustaches, it looks more appealing to me, and because I can". On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Leo Molas wrote: > > >> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 09:24:52AM +0100, Michael Everson wrote: > >> > >>> What I can't do is anticipate the reaction of the community at > >>> large to an edition of a book which treats Lojban like a real > >>> language rather than an oddball. > >> > > We are not treating Lojban as an oddball; we're treating it as a > language with is own set of rules, like any other language, that's going > to be butchered. There are some freedom and openness, because it's a > growing language. > > The freedom we have is the optional letters (don't forget "." and "," > are letters), putting "h" instead of "'", etc. It's established what we > can do without going outside the boundaries. > > The openness is for discussing what should be part of the language, > what's wrong, what should be changed from what's already official, etc. > Of course, that last one is what need more time. > > If you go beyond the boundaries, that's when we say it won't be lojban > what you're going to publish. > > >> It is of course very good that you are trying to treat Lojban as a > >> real language. But if treating it as a real language is your goal, > >> why not respect the conventions of casing and punctuation that has > >> been adhered to in all serious writing for the past couple of > >> decades? > > > > Your conventions *already* allow for variation. Exclamation marks and > > question marks are optional. The dot is optional. The option of > > choosing between capitalization or the acute accent for stress is > > already there. > > Starting a bridi and proper names with Caps isn't optional. > > >>> We have all sorts of orthographies for Lojban by now, from > >>> Cyrillic to Tengwar, and nobody says that they are "not Lojban". > >>> I think I understand why some people don't like a > >>> traditional-Latin orthography: it's an instance of "the uncanny > >>> valley", just enough like what you're used to to be upsetting. > >>> But the very fact that the two orthographies are isomorphic shows > >>> that the essential Lojbanity of the text is preserved. > > > > What's different about this, it's that you're going to use the "normal" > and official alphabet (that's a set of Latin alphabet; it's not that > lojban uses Latin typography), and use it the way you want (different > from the official and common one). If I use Tengwar or srilermorna, I > won't confuse any newbie, because it's clear it's not the common > typography. > > If you would have used that very same conventions we are discussing, in > another alphabet, no one would have had any problems (well, yes, to read > it, but no one would've been upset). > > That's why I think it's really *really* important that you clarify the > book isn't written with the normal conventions (like "experimental"). > > >> I don't understand what you are trying to accomplish by discussing > >> this, since you have evidently decided to ignore what we say > >> anyway. > > > > > > Some people have said "Don't do it! Change nothing!" Some people have > > said "Do it, but I'm sure I won't like it." Some people have said > > "Please do it; this sounds interesting." > > > > I seem to have been listening to all three kinds of comments. > > You didn't answer the question, as you didn't answered: > > >> For example, I could write a book in English, but I change all > >> >> characters 'a' with 'u', and all 'u' with '#' (saying it's because > >> >> it's more beautiful or readable). > > > > > > This is not analogous to what I am interested in doing. > > > > >> >> It would be a pain in the ass for all the English speakers, and, > >> >> assuming it's actually better, is not going to really help anyone, > >> >> since new speakers will be confused. > > > > > > The analogue would be to publish a book in English with all its > > > punctuation removed and with all capital letters converted to small > > > letters. > > > > > Nice analogy. As a English speaker, would you like a book like that > > (given the publisher claims it's more beautiful or sylish...)? > > > > I've decided that I don't want to publish the book, in my series of > > Alice books, without capitalization or punctuation. I've decided that > > I want to apply funky old-fashioned Victorian typographic standards. > > I think that it will make the text more legible to anyone who has > > never seen the language before. My market is Carrollian collectors as > > much as it is people who can read the text. I am confident that > > comparison of the English text and the Lojban text will be much > > easier for the reader if "normal" typographic conventions are used. > > > > It's great that you are confident with this. If there would have been a > discussion of this internally, before it went to the open public, it > would have been really better. But, again, we can't stop you from doing > that, so we'll see if it's better this way. > > mu'o mi'e .leos. > > -- > My lojban journal: http://learninglojban.wordpress.com > My personal blog: http://leomolas.tumblr.com > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. --001517576cb212b8580483051730 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable And I still don't understand what you stand to gain from changing thing= s to make them suit your tastes. =A0I get a mental picture of you looking t= hrough your many translations of alice and seeing them all use the same typ= ography but having no freaking clue what the words actually say. =A0I don&#= 39;t mean to sound mean, but it kind of sounds like someone coming over to = my house and drawing mustaches on all the art on my walls because "it&= #39;s more common for males from this period to have mustaches, it looks mo= re appealing to me, and because I can".

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Leo Molas <= span dir=3D"ltr"><leos.molas@gma= il.com> wrote:

>> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 09:24:52AM +0100, Michael Everson wrote: >>
>>> What I can't do is anticipate the reaction of the communit= y at
>>> large to an edition of a book which treats Lojban like a real<= br> >>> language rather than an oddball.
>>

We are not treating Lojban as an oddball; we're treating it as a<= br> language with is own set of rules, like any other language, that's goin= g
to be butchered. There are some freedom and openness, because it's a growing language.

The freedom we have is the optional letters (don't forget "."= and ","
are letters), putting "h" instead of "'", etc. It&#= 39;s established what we
can do without going outside the boundaries.

The openness is for discussing what should be part of the language,
what's wrong, what should be changed from what's already official, = etc.
Of course, that last one is what need more time.

If you go beyond the boundaries, that's when we say it won't be loj= ban
what you're going to publish.

>> It is of course very good that you are trying to treat Lojban as a=
>> real language. But if treating it as a real language is your goal,=
>> why not respect the conventions of casing and punctuation that has=
>> been adhered to in all serious writing for the past couple of
>> decades?
>
> Your conventions *already* allow for variation. Exclamation marks and<= br> > question marks are optional. The dot is optional. The option of
> choosing between capitalization or the acute accent for stress is
> already there.

Starting a bridi and proper names with Caps isn't optional.

>>> We have all sorts of orthographies for Lojban by now, from
>>> Cyrillic to Tengwar, and nobody says that they are "not L= ojban".
>>> I think I understand why some people don't like a
>>> traditional-Latin orthography: it's an instance of "t= he uncanny
>>> valley", just enough like what you're used to to be u= psetting.
>>> But the very fact that the two orthographies are isomorphic sh= ows
>>> that the essential Lojbanity of the text is preserved.
>

What's different about this, it's that you're going to us= e the "normal"
and official alphabet (that's a set of Latin alphabet; it's not tha= t
lojban uses Latin typography), and use it the way you want (different
from the official and common one). If I use Tengwar or srilermorna, I
won't confuse any newbie, because it's clear it's not the commo= n
typography.

If you would have used that very same conventions we are discussing, in
another alphabet, no one would have had any problems (well, yes, to read it, but no one would've been upset).

That's why I think it's really *really* important that you clarify = the
book isn't written with the normal conventions (like "experimental= ").

>> I don't understand what you are trying to accomplish by discus= sing
>> this, since you have evidently decided to ignore what we say
>> anyway.
>
>
> Some people have said "Don't do it! Change nothing!" Som= e people have
> said "Do it, but I'm sure I won't like it." Some peo= ple have said
> "Please do it; this sounds interesting."
>
> I seem to have been listening to all three kinds of comments.

You didn't answer the question, as you didn't answered:

>> For example, I could write a book in English, but I change all
>> >> characters 'a' with 'u', and all 'u&#= 39; with '#' (saying it's because
>> >> it's more beautiful or readable).
> >
> > This is not analogous to what I am interested in doing.
> >
>> >> It would be a pain in the ass for all the English speaker= s, and,
>> >> assuming it's actually better, is not going to really= help anyone,
>> >> since new speakers will be confused.
> >
> > The analogue would be to publish a book in English with all its > > punctuation removed and with all capital letters converted to sma= ll
> > letters.
> >
> Nice analogy. As a English speaker, would you like a book like that > (given the publisher claims it's more beautiful or sylish...)?


> I've decided that I don't want to publish the book, in my seri= es of
> Alice books, without capitalization or punctuation. I've decided t= hat
> I want to apply funky old-fashioned Victorian typographic standards. > I think that it will make the text more legible to anyone who has
> never seen the language before. My market is Carrollian collectors as<= br> > much as it is people who can read the text. I am confident that
> comparison of the English text and the Lojban text will be much
> easier for the reader if "normal" typographic conventions ar= e used.
>

It's great that you are confident with this. If there would have = been a
discussion of this internally, before it went to the open public, it
would have been really better. But, again, we can't stop you from doing=
that, so we'll see if it's better this way.

mu'o mi'e .leos.

--
My lojban journal: http://learninglojban.wordpress.com
My personal blog: = http://leomolas.tumblr.com


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--001517576cb212b8580483051730--