From 3lDO1SwoJBsg6820wqv5w6u0owz.q20z2xpo1u22uzsu52836.q20@groups.bounces.google.com Thu Apr 01 17:00:45 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f144.google.com ([209.85.210.144]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3lDO1SwoJBsg6820wqv5w6u0owz.q20z2xpo1u22uzsu52836.q20@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1NxUJV-0007zV-70 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:00:45 -0700 Received: by yxe8 with SMTP id 8sf1067157yxe.25 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:00:35 -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=RjudlXTSkQ7VvB2za8zdYHkvJpDCHRDf5N9hCIdY3s8=; b=T5RI+Nr6SKE9gKfhTjSDNwfxs2mr7yNUJ6JkGAN9iuzbj8JgrIPuHUbBt6ts2Ii4sr xkQy9oAHo+J62OElpCq9Tm8kFbDWzFY1RcReLXfOY8ftcVP+7c2HEzf49RiJf5BumkPJ VeNC3Sw3Jqf1+/wb/LIMJ4AxF/tnGRm9JQnoQ= 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=DaIf/OFgTTAKroKvwpicHD9FbZUIj3eykD0yLaTIjbmnV5JNAyHgP2wEeXX6tXSAcw We3yF2LKaT07n31qhXZJZ5tyHKlVew7aFfxh7o511rFV/UjhDSacH/3Qtu627R/jiHJl OhD8mCIZ/mSCTA2GNRys6vwyn1m4C1YSFB/vc= Received: by 10.91.59.20 with SMTP id m20mr243094agk.10.1270166420480; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:00:20 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.91.66.23 with SMTP id t23ls338274agk.6.p; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.91.150.2 with SMTP id c2mr2495593ago.13.1270166419245; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.91.150.2 with SMTP id c2mr2495588ago.13.1270166419146; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gx0-f220.google.com (mail-gx0-f220.google.com [209.85.217.220]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 24si378392yxe.1.2010.04.01.17.00.18; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:00:18 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.220 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.220; Received: by gxk20 with SMTP id 20so1211433gxk.12 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:00:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.5.20 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 16:59:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Doty Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 16:59:57 -0700 Received: by 10.101.128.17 with SMTP id f17mr3480623ann.173.1270166417200; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:00:17 -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 209.85.217.220 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/43230335ebb9de3e Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016368e29001b55e4048335aab9 --0016368e29001b55e4048335aab9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Oh, I'm sure there is bias in the ISO codes, and I agree that we've never going to get anything that is truly neutral. I just think that using the codes from an international organization, which has a complete list of all languages in the world, is a better bias to have than otherwise. As I said, though, I'm willing to consider other possibilities--again, I don't see autonyms as really working if the goal is to have something with a degree of consistency, but if people have other ideas... .kris. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 16:29, komfo,amonan wrote: > Hmm. Isn't there a cultural bias in the ISO codes? My recollection is that, > broadly speaking, the larger the language, the closer the code to the > autonym. > > In any event, I think if you look you can find cultural bias all over > Lojban. Although it's "designed to be culturally neutral", in practice I > think cultural bias can be minimized but not eliminated. > > Thanks for clearing up the reasoning on the language family codes. > > > mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Christopher Doty wrote: > >> 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. >> > > -- > 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. --0016368e29001b55e4048335aab9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Oh, I'm sure there is bias in the ISO codes, and I agree that we've= never going to get anything that is truly neutral. =A0I just think that us= ing the codes from an international organization, which has a complete list= of all languages in the world, is a better bias to have than otherwise.
As I said, though, I'm willing to consider other possibi= lities--again, I don't see autonyms as really working if the goal is to= have something with a degree of consistency, but if people have other idea= s...

.kris.

On Thu, Apr 1,= 2010 at 16:29, komfo,amonan <komfoamonan@gmail.com> wrote:
Hmm. Isn't there a cultural bias in the ISO codes? My recollection is t= hat, broadly speaking, the larger the language, the closer the code to the = autonym.

In any event, I think if you look you can find cultural bia= s all over Lojban. Although it's "designed to be culturally neutra= l", in practice I think cultural bias can be minimized but not elimina= ted.

Thanks for clearing up the reasoning on the language family codes.


mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan


On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 = at 6:39 PM, Christopher Doty <suomichris@gmail.com> wrote= :
<= /div>
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 15:07, komfo,amonan <komfoamonan@gmail.com> 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 Swe= dish-speaking ones, call the Finnish language "finska." =A0It see= ms like, from what you're say below, that we should call Finnish both f= inska and suomi. =A0But my question is, why? =A0What does that get Lojban s= peakers 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: l= anguages 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. =A0Plu= s, in most of these groups, their language is "the people's langua= ge" because the name of their group is "the people." =A0(Bir= dwalk: 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.

W= hat about if the language name was borrowed from a Bantu language, and so s= peakers 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 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 a= utonyms for all languages. Perhaps there is a general opinion that it is de= sirable to use the same method for devising words for all languages. I woul= d disagree with that & argue that it's better to use autonyms where= you can (the majority? the vast majority?), and exonyms otherwise. But I&#= 39;m not here to stand in the way of progress.

Well, see above; the onl= y way I can see using autonyms sometimes but not others would introduce a b= unch of cultural bias, which was one of my main goals in doing this. =A0(Al= so, it depends what you mean by "majority:" if we're going wi= th only major world languages, the exonym thing would be an issue, but in t= erms of actual numbers of languages, disregarding their distribution or num= ber of speakers, I'd bet the groups with no language name would outnumb= er the other, if only slightly.)
=A0
Is there, actually, an argument for including the ISO cod= e for the language family? Because I still can't wrap my brain around t= hat. And I'd like to. (And that is my main point, which I failed to mak= e clear earlier.)

A couple reasons. =A0If you bu= y 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 t= o be fu'ivla. =A0There are other ways to make them longer, of course (d= oubling, using the autonym, etc.) but using the language family is, I think= , cool, for a number of reasons: it incorporates information about the lang= uages into their names, which is great from a linguistic perspective. =A0Pl= us, English does something similar, where many language names end in -ese o= r -ian. =A0I've been thinking of the ISO language family codes as a sor= t of suffix which says, not only, "Hi, I'm a language!" like = -ese does in English, but also says something about where the language come= s from. =A0Which, I will repeat, I think is cool :) =A0I'm not opposed = to other ideas for lengthening the ISO language codes, I just haven't s= een any mentioned on the list yet.

Chris

--
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@googlegrou= ps.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 &= quot;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/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.
--0016368e29001b55e4048335aab9--