From 3rw6ySwcJBrsfzfpovthnbjm.dpnmpkcbohpphmfhspvqt.dpn@groups.bounces.google.com Tue Mar 30 07:46:40 2010 Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3rw6ySwcJBrsfzfpovthnbjm.dpnmpkcbohpphmfhspvqt.dpn@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1Nwci5-0004US-Dv for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:39 -0700 Received: by gyd5 with SMTP id 5sf18689360gyd.16 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:23 -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=radvAsBB4+OiCuYRZAcONRhZcDKOX+2lbUrwcWrgfZg=; b=lHTJ9qb8lHemK57xwBgZFddhya3/KrRwf2hry/0euJ38xmL4jApo2X76t4FurDjN1C 82aEZqRYm3ljI8xrK+mWguSjXTL1cbWxOkR3/x1hVnQ0JZG0j1ELlZHiRD2veMzLzZf1 Nlk8J86qkLGkhXyYyzbdP0rEenmzUYWnyZY60= 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=RxGwIXw1qzIRyoeiUGOtLyoYpVe2CeT/sdBQqbJQmSMjKpwrXUVjDrPxX/HszHE4ik s1u7J+4u8FzNkLh/S9ff78SuhI9VA6nSlDd3+TXYRb9QBR9qFFK+QD2F5QPE0FhRJe5E AKXG2LKHJUiHbGp+cdn43B3LtNAgN0rPhceOw= Received: by 10.91.101.18 with SMTP id d18mr513833agm.25.1269960367942; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:07 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.35.68 with SMTP id o4ls3056670bkd.1.p; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.16.81 with SMTP id n17mr431388bka.11.1269960366655; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.16.81 with SMTP id n17mr431385bka.11.1269960366599; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com (mail-wy0-f174.google.com [74.125.82.174]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id e24si6524321bke.6.2010.03.30.07.46.05; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:05 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.174 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.174; Received: by wyb39 with SMTP id 39so1683034wyb.33 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.2.209 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <37457605-902E-44CB-BE49-02A30FC20700@gmail.com> References: <2320FCB7-86FE-4E30-9F24-DAD6E40024D7@evertype.com> <5715b9301003291146h66475c74off6625befee8fdf5@mail.gmail.com> <702226df1003291319s63636a59t68668f5a79e79d4b@mail.gmail.com> <241890.82160.qm@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <37457605-902E-44CB-BE49-02A30FC20700@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:46:04 -0600 Received: by 10.216.87.134 with SMTP id y6mr2292392wee.20.1269960365013; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:46:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <702226df1003300746s108686d3pb7fc2ad4426fb6e9@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] la .alis. From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.174 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@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/13bb2adbdc7475cc Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d77e886f8842048305b03d --0016e6d77e886f8842048305b03d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 3:10 AM, Michael Everson wrote: > On 29 Mar 2010, at 22:06, John E Clifford wrote: > > > Amazing as it may seem, Lojban, as a language, is a spoken object. Since > there are few people who would claim that they actually speak it (and even > fewer who could back up that claim in a face-to-face) , for most Lojbanist > Lojban exists as a written object. Thus, *how* Lojban is written takes on > many of the aspects that would occur in a normal language about how it was > spoken -- with favored dialects and accents and so on. And, as in most > cases where snobbery is an issue, discussion can get to be rather intense -- > and off topic and off courtesy. The only requirement for a writing system > for Lojban is that there be a written-spoken isomorphism; what that > isomorphism is doesn't really matter (as witness the range of variations > already accepted). A Lojban writing system with proper names capitalized > and the first functional word of each sentence similarly, would still be an > adequate writing system, though with a slightly more complex isomorphism > (after all G and g stand for the same sound), and if we threw in a few > punctuation marks proper (commas for subordinate clauses, say, question > marks, and quotes of one sort or another), an isomorphism would still hold > (though again a slightly more complex one). And some clarity might > occasionally be gained. And some elegance or whatever lost. > > On 29 Mar 2010, at 22:06, John E Clifford wrote: > > > amazing as it may seem lojban as a language is a spoken object since > there are few people who would claim that they actually speak it and even > fewer who could back up that claim in a facetoface for most lojbanist lojban > exists as a written object thus how lojban is written takes on many of the > aspects that would occur in a normal language about how it was spoken with > favored dialects and accents and so on and as in most cases where snobbery > is an issue discussion can get to be rather intense and off topic and off > courtesy the only requirement for a writing system for lojban is that there > be a writtenspoken isomorphism; what that isomorphism is doesnt really > matter as witness the range of variations already accepted a lojban writing > system with proper names capitalized and the first functional word of each > sentence similarly would still be an adequate writing system though with a > slightly more complex isomorphism after all g and g stand for the same sound > and if we threw in a few punctuation marks proper commas for subordinate > clauses say question marks and quotes of one sort or another an isomorphism > would still hold though again a slightly more complex one and some clarity > might occasionally be gained and some elegance or whatever lost > > Note that these texts are the same.\ > No they aren't. The second has no indication of sentence separation, incidental clauses, or a great many other things that written English uses punctuation to express. Your argument doesn't hold for the simple reason that English *needs* punctuation in it's writing to make sense. Lojban doesn't. It's "punctuation" is words, such as {.i}, {xu}, {mo}, {.ui}, and etc. > > Michael > > -- > 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. > > -- mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu -- 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. --0016e6d77e886f8842048305b03d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 3:10 AM, Michael Everson= <michael= .everson@gmail.com> wrote:
On 29 Mar 2010, at 22:06, John E Clifford wrote:

> Amazing as it may seem, Lojban, as a language, is a spoken object. =A0= Since there are few people who would claim that they actually speak it (and= even fewer who could back up that claim in a face-to-face) , for most Lojb= anist Lojban exists as a written object. =A0Thus, *how* Lojban is written t= akes on many of the aspects that would occur in a normal language about how= it was spoken -- with favored dialects and accents and so on. =A0And, as i= n most cases where snobbery is an issue, discussion can get to be rather in= tense -- and off topic and off courtesy. =A0The only requirement for a writ= ing system for Lojban is that there be a written-spoken isomorphism; what t= hat isomorphism is doesn't really matter (as witness =A0the range of va= riations already accepted). =A0A Lojban writing system with proper names ca= pitalized and the first functional word of each sentence similarly, would s= till be an adequate writing system, though with a slightly more complex iso= morphism (after all G and g stand for the same sound), and if we threw in a= few punctuation marks proper (commas for subordinate clauses, say, questio= n marks, and quotes of one sort or another), an isomorphism would still hol= d (though again a slightly more complex one). =A0And some clarity might occ= asionally be gained. =A0And some elegance or whatever lost.

On 29 Mar 2010, at 22:06, John E Clifford wrote:

> amazing as it may seem lojban as a language is a spoken object since t= here are few people who would claim that they actually speak it and even fe= wer who could back up that claim in a facetoface for most lojbanist lojban = exists as a written object thus how lojban is written takes on many of the = aspects that would occur in a normal language about how it was spoken with = favored dialects and accents and so on and as in most cases where snobbery = is an issue discussion can get to be rather intense and off topic and off c= ourtesy the only requirement for a writing system for lojban is that there = be a writtenspoken isomorphism; what that isomorphism is doesnt really matt= er as witness the range of variations already accepted a lojban writing sys= tem with proper names capitalized and the first functional word of each sen= tence similarly would still be an adequate writing system though with a sli= ghtly more complex isomorphism after all g and g stand for the same sound a= nd if we threw in a few punctuation marks proper commas for subordinate cla= uses say question marks and quotes of one sort or another an isomorphism wo= uld still hold though again a slightly more complex one and some clarity mi= ght occasionally be gained and some elegance or whatever lost

Note that these texts are the same.\

No= they aren't. The second has no indication of sentence separation, inci= dental clauses, or a great many other things that written English uses punc= tuation to express. Your argument doesn't hold for the simple reason th= at English needs=A0punctuation in it's writing to make sense. Lo= jban doesn't. It's "punctuation" is words, such as {.i}, = {xu}, {mo}, {.ui}, and etc.

Michael

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.




--
mu'o mi= 'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu
=

--
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.
--0016e6d77e886f8842048305b03d--