From lojban+bncCJ2w4Zy_AhCDnP7dBBoEOuNKrg@googlegroups.com Fri Apr 09 13:29:18 2010 Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1O0KpE-0007h1-Fw for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:29:18 -0700 Received: by gyd5 with SMTP id 5sf1935420gyd.16 for ; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:29:06 -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:from:date:received:message-id:subject: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=XnOgVsA6RlNjwvwbVFK1IIwCdqKBhjEjrovWSAi9Jn0=; b=389qg8Z8rl8yRGGAb2Vo9DLl3lGTZicPT2X9g1FEEvg0Lryom9Fo3oEH1X7lQDLqG0 9Yg+LsdSvN6s1BTG4aRh/cb644NzU67V/5g3AHz6pEhDhJu5yolHBApe4xMrvbpIU8mB ymtZ7zAjGi8/NRmRbOlDRnJBkEDh85ZXkI4c4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject: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=Ez5lNPDh2bHXuwC4L8aOpzv+IBB//ZHfdKNsLCzqUXp6vAWZ6To0Ed0Wl1iQ6VygeC 7p8ejz8FFH8sUovEpfEsSBj/2aMu7r/hbwc3VjCevl5D7EZVEjiPTJARtxclvxCy0jiY F+RTBYIdqehUpAIianuQ8Yku9HYpFkgH82p18= Received: by 10.101.180.35 with SMTP id h35mr34188anp.70.1270844931354; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:28:51 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.142.37 with SMTP id u37ls120524ann.7.p; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:28:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.202.40 with SMTP id e40mr77460anq.50.1270844930608; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:28:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.202.40 with SMTP id e40mr77455anq.50.1270844930537; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:28:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gy0-f176.google.com (mail-gy0-f176.google.com [209.85.160.176]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 12si138147gxk.6.2010.04.09.13.28.49; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:28:49 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.176 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.160.176; Received: by gyf1 with SMTP id 1so1803626gyf.21 for ; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:28:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.5.20 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 13:28:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5BD52966-8515-4803-B313-88F4551A2ACD@gmail.com> References: <20100405210225.GW6084@digitalkingdom.org> <20100409002127.GA11541@digitalkingdom.org> <867212.21796.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <5BD52966-8515-4803-B313-88F4551A2ACD@gmail.com> From: Christopher Doty Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 13:28:29 -0700 Received: by 10.101.108.6 with SMTP id k6mr974531anm.162.1270844929363; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:28:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-announcements] Essay on the future of Lojban, with a simple poll for the community. To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.176 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=suomichris@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: suomichris@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/c67f210addc06a0c X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/74a1ad8a5abec272 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636ed7681944f110483d3a4d0 --001636ed7681944f110483d3a4d0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I'm glad you enjoyed it--I rather enjoyed writing it! The stuff I talked about, BTW, was what I mentioned as my "manifesto" a few days back and never wrote. It ended up not being very manifesto-y, but whatever :p On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 13:05, Michael Everson wrote: > I really enjoyed reading this. (I am a historical linguist. None of that > generative transformational crap for me.) > > On 9 Apr 2010, at 20:31, Christopher Doty wrote: > > > I am, very very fortunate not be part of the school of linguistics that > believes in silly things like transformations (nor Russel's teapot). When I > say that Lojban violates things that human languages do, I'm not appealing > in any sense to "Universal Grammar;" I'm simply say that, when you look at > the languages of the world (henceforth, "languages"), certain things happen > and certain things don't. Maybe they CAN, but the fact that they don't is > pretty telling about human brains process speech. > > > > I see two, maybe three, areas where there is a problem from a linguistic > perspective. The first is that languages do not have verbs with more than > four unmarked slots for a predicate, and there are VERY few that have four; > the vast majority of verbs in the vast majority of languages have three or > less. If you get more than four, you ALWAYS have some sort of marking (most > often as an oblique phrase; i.e., a preposition or a postposition)) that > indicates how the additional argument relates to the predicate. Yet, Lojban > has gismu which take more than four arguments. If it were testable, I would > put a LOT of money the fact that, after Lojban was released into the wild, > you could do a text count and find that predicates rarely, if ever, have > more than three arguments in them, and that the three arguments pretty much > always had the three closest to the gismu. > > > > It is worthwhile to note, especially for those who like Lojban to be > mind-bending, that this fact likely has nothing to do with language, and > everything to do with cognition. On average, working memory holds something > like 4-7 items (try using a phone menu with 9 items; it is extremely > annoying and frustrating, and makes it hard to do anything except listen to > the list of options). It is thus no surprise that, in languages, four is > the maximum (three arguments and a verb, with a couple verbs that take > four), especially if one considers that most utterances have more than just > the verbs and the arguments. I think this is what you meant by "processing > depth"--the problem is that most humans actually CAN'T PROCESS at the depth > needed for a gismu with seven places. You could argue that this processing > depth is learnable--maybe it is, but I'd bet that learning to hold more in > working memory is very closely tied to how much you could process before any > training. This also might be fine for a written language, since you can sit > and look at a sentence, but in speech, people just aren't going to be able > to process Lojban. > > > > The second problem (or second half of this first problem) is that some of > the gismu seem to have tons of extra stuff in them that is not something > that would be included in the meaning of a word in any language. "Bucket," > for example, contains a predicate slot for the material the bucket is made > from. This, as far as I could tell, was thrown in to make the gismu have > more slots. The material a bucket is made of has far less to do with > bucketness than, say, all of the things in klama have to do with going. And > why does "bucket" have it and not, say, "bird"? I can call something that > isn't a living bird (say, a drawing of a bird), but why doesn't it a gismu > slot to indicate it's material? If buckets get a slot for material, so > should everything. > > > > Both of these things are easily fixed, though, without totally barfing up > Lojban. There might be a few special gismu that have more than four slots, > but for most, the additional slots should really be looked at to see if they > are needed, along with the weird ones in words like "bucket." A handful of > cmavo (or even gismu) for things like "material made of" would be much more > widely useable, as would a very general something like "means." > > > > The third thing is more of a pet peeve, and not something I would > actually like to see changed (although it is worth considering if a new > LoCCan is created), and that is that the process of word creation results in > things which are very, very similar--all gismu, for example, have a set > structure which is clearly delimited. Although this is very logical and > makes it easy to point at a word and tell, completely unambiguously, if it > is a gismu or not, it is simply not how languages work. For example, the > words for colors in English have no clear relationship to each other, nor > that class to the class of intransitive verbs. But, in Lojban, EVERYTHING > that makes a predicate looks like everything else that makes a predicate. I > would very much doubt that memorizing the 1300 or so gismu in Lojban would > be at all comparable to learning 1300 of, say, Spanish, because there is > more for your brain to stick to. (This is also part of my objection to > Jorge's language-name proposal, but I'll address that separately.) > > > > So, there 'tis--what the linguist doesn't like about Lojban (which, it is > worth noting, is far less than what he DOES like, but still). > > > > Chris > > > > -- > > 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. > > -- > 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. > > -- 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. --001636ed7681944f110483d3a4d0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm glad you enjoyed it--I rather enjoyed writing it!

The stuff I talked about, BTW, was what I mentioned as my "manifesto= " a few days back and never wrote. =A0It ended up not being very manif= esto-y, but whatever :p

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 13:05, Michael Everso= n <michae= l.everson@gmail.com> wrote:

On 9 Apr 2010, at 20:31, Christopher Doty wrote:

> I am, very very fortunate not be part of the school of linguistics tha= t believes in silly things like transformations (nor Russel's teapot). = =A0When I say that Lojban violates things that human languages do, I'm = not appealing in any sense to "Universal Grammar;" I'm simply= say that, when you look at the languages of the world (henceforth, "l= anguages"), certain things happen and certain things don't. =A0May= be they CAN, but the fact that they don't is pretty telling about human= brains process speech.
>
> I see two, maybe three, areas where there is a problem from a linguist= ic perspective. =A0The first is that languages do not have verbs with more = than four unmarked slots for a predicate, and there are VERY few that have = four; the vast majority of verbs in the vast majority of languages have thr= ee or less. =A0If you get more than four, you ALWAYS have some sort of mark= ing (most often as an oblique phrase; i.e., a preposition or a postposition= )) that indicates how the additional argument relates to the predicate. =A0= Yet, Lojban has gismu which take more than four arguments. =A0If it were te= stable, I would put a LOT of money the fact that, after Lojban was released= into the wild, you could do a text count and find that predicates rarely, = if ever, have more than three arguments in them, and that the three argumen= ts pretty much always had the three closest to the gismu.
>
> It is worthwhile to note, especially for those who like Lojban to be m= ind-bending, that this fact likely has nothing to do with language, and eve= rything to do with cognition. =A0On average, working memory holds something= like 4-7 items (try using a phone menu with 9 items; it is extremely annoy= ing and frustrating, and makes it hard to do anything except listen to the = list of options). =A0It is thus no surprise that, in languages, four is the= maximum (three arguments and a verb, with a couple verbs that take four), = especially if one considers that most utterances have more than just the ve= rbs and the arguments. I think this is what you meant by "processing d= epth"--the problem is that most humans actually CAN'T PROCESS at t= he depth needed for a gismu with seven places. =A0You could argue that this= processing depth is learnable--maybe it is, but I'd bet that learning = to hold more in working memory is very closely tied to how much you could p= rocess before any training. =A0This also might be fine for a written langua= ge, since you can sit and look at a sentence, but in speech, people just ar= en't going to be able to process Lojban.
>
> The second problem (or second half of this first problem) is that some= of the gismu seem to have tons of extra stuff in them that is not somethin= g that would be included in the meaning of a word in any language. =A0"= ;Bucket," for example, contains a predicate slot for the material the = bucket is made from. This, as far as I could tell, was thrown in to make th= e gismu have more slots. =A0The material a bucket is made of has far less t= o do with bucketness than, say, all of the things in klama have to do with = going. =A0And why does "bucket" have it and not, say, "bird&= quot;? =A0I can call something that isn't a living bird (say, a drawing= of a bird), but why doesn't it a gismu slot to indicate it's mater= ial? =A0If buckets get a slot for material, so should everything.
>
> Both of these things are easily fixed, though, without totally barfing= up Lojban. =A0There might be a few special gismu that have more than four = slots, but for most, the additional slots should really be looked at to see= if they are needed, along with the weird ones in words like "bucket.&= quot; =A0A handful of cmavo (or even gismu) for things like "material = made of" would be much more widely useable, as would a very general so= mething like "means."
>
> The third thing is more of a pet peeve, and not something I would actu= ally like to see changed (although it is worth considering if a new LoCCan = is created), and that is that the process of word creation results in thing= s which are very, very similar--all gismu, for example, have a set structur= e which is clearly delimited. =A0Although this is very logical and makes it= easy to point at a word and tell, completely unambiguously, if it is a gis= mu or not, it is simply not how languages work. =A0For example, the words f= or colors in English have no clear relationship to each other, nor that cla= ss to the class of intransitive verbs. =A0But, in Lojban, EVERYTHING that m= akes a predicate looks like everything else that makes a predicate. =A0I wo= uld very much doubt that memorizing the 1300 or so gismu in Lojban would be= at all comparable to learning 1300 of, say, Spanish, because there is more= for your brain to stick to. =A0(This is also part of my objection to Jorge= 's language-name proposal, but I'll address that separately.)
>
> So, there 'tis--what the linguist doesn't like about Lojban (w= hich, it is worth noting, is far less than what he DOES like, but still). >
> Chris
>
> --
> You received this message because yo= u 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=3Den.

--
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.


--
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.
--001636ed7681944f110483d3a4d0--