From 361C1SwoJBj0rtnlhbgqhrflZhk.bnlkniaZmfnnfkdfqntor.bnl@groups.bounces.google.com Thu Apr 01 19:05:57 2010 Received: from mail-yw0-f160.google.com ([209.85.211.160]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <361C1SwoJBj0rtnlhbgqhrflZhk.bnlkniaZmfnnfkdfqntor.bnl@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1NxWGe-0007La-BE for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:57 -0700 Received: by ywh32 with SMTP id 32sf1819272ywh.28 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:46 -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=VQVwGJ/EOG2iRgYcGawajDIhAnujhhzOU0N519OP6jE=; b=hcRxs8Ek4sSAUQiq10wpl4e6NoScVM08c47vfmbRWxTyO0xfMrQCYDWePriZWlmTKm dziBuHy6uLVgP+vpDG8PFZEF5lRt1FzsQVT0nHvzBBGpwuuhvjsI8KHF7mpeVQfm/I38 Jd4/3GtkgPMCDO5DFZDBcN3JKuWu0U3JkBmY8= 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=XWlCCvAtsF40C3Tl7yK8JWFaq1ZUY8aRS42UHwV5GHeK8y7W0t6q+5SNzi6NREA9Dn ieIwcIjPDzp9d0c/Ic2zebyTTErCoi9+NuacNcrvd58wbXGno8kFGROys56Ov34PI9Co kEeaEGjU/7U3Vzz59Y7mAa//QbbPLw/V2mLSY= Received: by 10.150.234.2 with SMTP id g2mr103564ybh.28.1270173931492; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:31 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.91.66.23 with SMTP id t23ls357129agk.6.p; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.131.19 with SMTP id e19mr3293326agd.6.1270173928899; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.131.19 with SMTP id e19mr3293324agd.6.1270173928813; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gx0-f222.google.com (mail-gx0-f222.google.com [209.85.217.222]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 18si386809yxe.12.2010.04.01.19.05.27; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:27 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of suomichris@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.222 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.222; Received: by gxk22 with SMTP id 22so1316223gxk.4 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.5.20 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 19:05:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Doty Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 19:05:07 -0700 Received: by 10.101.134.3 with SMTP id l3mr4185624ann.200.1270173927186; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] So what do we say for Swedish? (was "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 209.85.217.222 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/b7cc2efa3fc3ba64 X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/a601b89e6034d925 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5be08bbbba10483376972 --001636c5be08bbbba10483376972 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 18:35, Oren wrote: > > Lojban day-to-day: What do we say for Sweden and Swedish? > > sweden: { gugde la .sy .ebu } > swedish: { bangu la .sy .vy } > > My serious suggestion has been to spell out the names of the ISO > standards. I'm thinking this is the way to go. I have little interest in trying to develop lojbanized words when the entire point of doing so seems to have been lost on at least some. I would say that we need to use the current standard for this, though (i.e., 639-3), or there will be conflicts in meaning--and, I mean, the whole list exists, might as well use it. > Lojban claims to be culturally neutral and then decides to > forgo the worlds largest standards-making body, an international > non-government organization with a mission of consensus-based > decision-making... can we do it better? Should we try? > I, like you (seem to be), am kind of confused by the seemingly negative response from some corners to the ISO codes. They are specifically designed, by consensus, to be as neutral and international as possible. Why are we revisiting that? If you think Lojban should indeed be culturally neutral, then what is your objection? -- 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. --001636c5be08bbbba10483376972 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 18:35, Oren <get.oren@gmail.com> wrote:
> Lojban day-to-day: What do we say for Sweden and Swe= dish?

sweden: { gugde la .sy .ebu }
swedish: { bangu la .sy .vy }

My serious suggestion has been to spell out the names of the ISO
standards.

I'm thinking this is the way= to go. =A0I have little interest in trying to develop lojbanized words whe= n the entire point of doing so seems to have been lost on at least some. = =A0I would say that we need to use the current standard for this, though (i= .e., 639-3), or there will be conflicts in meaning--and, I mean, the whole = list exists, might as well use it.
=A0
Lojban claims to be culturall= y neutral and then decides to
forgo the worlds largest standards-making body, an international
non-government organization with a mission of consensus-based
decision-making... can we do it better? Should we try?

I, like you (seem to be), am kind of confused by the seemin= gly negative response from some corners to the ISO codes. =A0They are speci= fically designed, by consensus, to be as neutral and international as possi= ble. =A0Why are we revisiting that? =A0If you think Lojban should indeed be= culturally neutral, then what is your objection?

--
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.
--001636c5be08bbbba10483376972--