From 3uyC1SwoJBtwQSMKGAFPGQEK8GJ.AMKJMH98LEMMEJCEPMSNQ.AMK@groups.bounces.google.com Thu Apr 01 15:40:21 2010 Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3uyC1SwoJBtwQSMKGAFPGQEK8GJ.AMKJMH98LEMMEJCEPMSNQ.AMK@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1NxT3g-0004fd-VH for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:40:21 -0700 Received: by gwb1 with SMTP id 1sf1824843gwb.16 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:40:10 -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=Lib1aiuIz1M2Pw4pP5Qh7Vz9az9X1jIyQen0ZR1qL4w=; b=2oQcUBysuubzx+pk5kJ0KE/xAP/ucWKBP8DIbCDKjBHaxHLHxWHAbTtu9N5QHAQaUp mt4M18kIrzQuafm+n6QPJftux3HsyqirKUrUb64y9Iv2yDCjtPfUDD/l1lWQ2SzrC/2L MNwT+Tdh+gsPiPSloyOoF2sSds+eNjMCbun1g= 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=2qURbxSH0/ct+2J07frqg+r1fLKgbkl4jf1auzoIJzM07rklL4tcdAcI+ExMC1b7Fl ZiF8IFDE4uxz/XdJ9sPobquwPqzA93nnwsBq/aYJIPCjwhqdlKv2X54G98u1JGXYqHTL 3WP/3jbFHqIE4hIe5MW0e7a4BN1fqGHciQsbI= Received: by 10.90.19.14 with SMTP id 14mr238639ags.5.1270161595959; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:39:55 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.90.248.13 with SMTP id v13ls331293agh.7.p; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:39:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.131.19 with SMTP id e19mr2994345agd.6.1270161594514; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:39:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.131.19 with SMTP id e19mr2994344agd.6.1270161594404; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:39:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yx0-f186.google.com (mail-yx0-f186.google.com [209.85.210.186]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 18si772669ywh.5.2010.04.01.15.39.53; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.186 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.186; Received: by mail-yx0-f186.google.com with SMTP id 16so821655yxe.9 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:39:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.5.20 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 15:39:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Doty Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 15:39:33 -0700 Received: by 10.101.128.17 with SMTP id f17mr3317277ann.173.1270161593171; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Summary: Cultural fu'ivla To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.186 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/6edf3f52e6f491ba X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/a72a4fb4d9129ed1 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016368e29009180b80483348aa4 --0016368e29009180b80483348aa4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 15:07, komfo,amonan wrote: > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Christopher Doty wrote: > >> This was brought up before, but I don't know that it was closed "closed" >> exactly. As I said earlier today, though, using the autonyms directly >> creates any number of problems, one of which could even be the claim that >> doing so makes these words more culturally biased than the international >> standard. > > > I disagree. If the Finns call their language 'suomen', I place more weight > on that than on what other people call it. > But some Finns, namely the Swedish-speaking ones, call the Finnish language "finska." It seems like, from what you're say below, that we should call Finnish both finska and suomi. But my question is, why? What does that get Lojban speakers or learners? > What about groups that don't have names for their languages? >> > > In those cases, an exonym is fine. Although if they have a name for the > group, maybe use that? > But then you've reintroduced cultural bias: languages which have speakers who name their own language get to name it in Lojban; if you don't name your language, you're out of luck. Plus, in most of these groups, their language is "the people's language" because the name of their group is "the people." (Birdwalk: this is portrayed with surprising fidelity in _Avatar_.) Do we keep the "ki-" prefixes, along with their variants, for all of the >> Bantu languages? If so, then why not keep the "lingua" with "lingua >> latina"? >> > > I would dispense with those as derivative, but again, that's not the point > I'm making. > What about if the language name was borrowed from a Bantu language, and so speakers don't realize that the ki- prefix is a prefix, and treat it as part of the word? I realize this isn't your point, and to some extent I'm thinking out loud; it just seems like any sort of autonym-based system is going to have a ton of problems and inconsistencies and difficulties in coming up with the lexical items for different languages, as opposed to something based on or derived from the ISO. If there is going to be that degree of inconsistency, it seems like there should be some benefit from doing so. So I overstated my case; clearly we can't use autonyms for all languages. > Perhaps there is a general opinion that it is desirable to use the same > method for devising words for all languages. I would disagree with that & > argue that it's better to use autonyms where you can (the majority? the vast > majority?), and exonyms otherwise. But I'm not here to stand in the way of > progress. > Well, see above; the only way I can see using autonyms sometimes but not others would introduce a bunch of cultural bias, which was one of my main goals in doing this. (Also, it depends what you mean by "majority:" if we're going with only major world languages, the exonym thing would be an issue, but in terms of actual numbers of languages, disregarding their distribution or number of speakers, I'd bet the groups with no language name would outnumber the other, if only slightly.) > Is there, actually, an argument for including the ISO code for the language > family? Because I still can't wrap my brain around that. And I'd like to. > (And that is my main point, which I failed to make clear earlier.) > A couple reasons. If you buy the idea that the ISO language code should be the basis, then you have a problem (if you don't, then you don't): they're far too short to be fu'ivla. There are other ways to make them longer, of course (doubling, using the autonym, etc.) but using the language family is, I think, cool, for a number of reasons: it incorporates information about the languages into their names, which is great from a linguistic perspective. Plus, English does something similar, where many language names end in -ese or -ian. I've been thinking of the ISO language family codes as a sort of suffix which says, not only, "Hi, I'm a language!" like -ese does in English, but also says something about where the language comes from. Which, I will repeat, I think is cool :) I'm not opposed to other ideas for lengthening the ISO language codes, I just haven't seen any mentioned on the list yet. 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. --0016368e29009180b80483348aa4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 15:07, komfo,amonan <komfoamonan@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Christopher Doty <= ;suomichris@gmail= .com> wrote:
This was brought up before, but I don't know that it was closed "c= losed" exactly. =A0As I said earlier today, though, using the autonyms= directly creates any number of problems, one of which could even be the cl= aim that doing so makes these words more culturally biased than the interna= tional standard.

I disagree. If the Finns call their language 'suomen'= ;, I place more weight on that than on what other people call it.
=

But some Finns, namely the Swedish-s= peaking ones, call the Finnish language "finska." =A0It seems lik= e, from what you're say below, that we should call Finnish both finska = and suomi. =A0But my question is, why? =A0What does that get Lojban speaker= s or learners?
=A0
What about groups that don't have names for their languages? =A0

=A0In those cases, an exonym is fine. Altho= ugh if they have a name for the group, maybe use that?

But then you've reintroduced cultural bias: languag= es which have speakers who name their own language get to name it in Lojban= ; if you don't name your language, you're out of luck. =A0Plus, in = most of these groups, their language is "the people's language&quo= t; because the name of their group is "the people." =A0(Birdwalk:= this is portrayed with surprising fidelity in _Avatar_.)

Do we keep the "ki-" prefixes, along with their variants, fo= r all of the Bantu languages? =A0If so, then why not keep the "lingua&= quot; with "lingua latina"? =A0

I would dispense with those as derivative, but again, that's not the po= int I'm making.

What ab= out if the language name was borrowed from a Bantu language, and so speaker= s don't realize that the ki- prefix is a prefix, and treat it as part o= f the word?

I realize this isn't your point, and to some extent= I'm thinking out loud; it just seems like any sort of autonym-based sy= stem is going to have a ton of problems and inconsistencies and difficultie= s in coming up with the lexical items for different languages, as opposed t= o something based on or derived from the ISO. =A0If there is going to be th= at degree of inconsistency, it seems like there should be some benefit from= doing so.

So I overstated my case; clearly we can't use autonyms for all langu= ages. Perhaps there is a general opinion that it is desirable to use the sa= me method for devising words for all languages. I would disagree with that = & argue that it's better to use autonyms where you can (the majorit= y? the vast majority?), and exonyms otherwise. But I'm not here to stan= d in the way of progress.

Well, see above; the only way = I can see using autonyms sometimes but not others would introduce a bunch o= f cultural bias, which was one of my main goals in doing this. =A0(Also, it= depends what you mean by "majority:" if we're going with onl= y major world languages, the exonym thing would be an issue, but in terms o= f actual numbers of languages, disregarding their distribution or number of= speakers, I'd bet the groups with no language name would outnumber the= other, if only slightly.)
=A0
Is = there, actually, an argument for including the ISO code for the language fa= mily? Because I still can't wrap my brain around that. And I'd like= to. (And that is my main point, which I failed to make clear earlier.)

A couple reasons. =A0If you buy the = idea that the ISO language code should be the basis, then you have a proble= m (if you don't, then you don't): they're far too short to be f= u'ivla. =A0There are other ways to make them longer, of course (doublin= g, using the autonym, etc.) but using the language family is, I think, cool= , for a number of reasons: it incorporates information about the languages = into their names, which is great from a linguistic perspective. =A0Plus, En= glish does something similar, where many language names end in -ese or -ian= . =A0I've been thinking of the ISO language family codes as a sort of s= uffix which says, not only, "Hi, I'm a language!" like -ese d= oes in English, but also says something about where the language comes from= . =A0Which, I will repeat, I think is cool :) =A0I'm not opposed to oth= er ideas for lengthening the ISO language codes, I just haven't seen an= y mentioned on the list yet.

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@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--0016368e29009180b80483348aa4--