From 3BGXHSwsJBnwqzpjfgjwljslrfnq.htrqtogfslttlqjlwtzux.htr@groups.bounces.google.com Thu Apr 15 12:12:29 2010 Received: from mail-qy0-f165.google.com ([209.85.221.165]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3BGXHSwsJBnwqzpjfgjwljslrfnq.htrqtogfslttlqjlwtzux.htr@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1O2UUA-0008RU-TU; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:29 -0700 Received: by qyk37 with SMTP id 37sf1984890qyk.20 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:16 -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=se2lGwAU+CHQYuYg7qLqHycGnP8avUL0f2zR5nw0KR8=; b=1tKi41MtkCUCChGhxrxIyxT6L0LvnER9msG5BgSapv7DXOtWyLrF1dHegfrLOd2bLn iq/DJoiJjBLIj48zXfNx64kYOXvOIIVT2byvoSCmHP5t7EOKDVKUyLezFcsMNVUy98+p js6Kpjh4sY1SEJivP2znEZyYZ0Gd80a6LjtRQ= 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=pO1vbqiMgDChEgZ1ygUdqRqVG22Ka7EGKNXSPBk0VMGPir347iw9zG5gliBdrKMjzF 6pBsKVmxxhys6wJhTaEHVbD50eQ95gmhgZpepcNU6ZvI7nqiYZFbVnPSBArNd60kSZ9g Qva0c/VfDVbofhhwUdLhap9+Mcyhw1B2PAQNA= Received: by 10.229.112.18 with SMTP id u18mr29563qcp.22.1271358724320; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:04 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.50.82 with SMTP id y18ls766622qcf.1.p; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.211.65 with SMTP id gn1mr39249qcb.7.1271358722519; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.211.65 with SMTP id gn1mr39248qcb.7.1271358722413; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f43.google.com (mail-vw0-f43.google.com [209.85.212.43]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 19si320378qyk.9.2010.04.15.12.12.01; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.43; Received: by vws3 with SMTP id 3so994889vws.2 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.167.140 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4BC75BDC.3010607@lojban.org> References: <4BBE188B.8070807@lojban.org> <201585.79379.qm@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <201004132253.05621.phma@phma.optus.nu> <4a02d723-a934-434a-b626-0a3a9fbf803f@u22g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> <4BC741FF.30708@lojban.org> <4BC75BDC.3010607@lojban.org> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:12:00 -0400 Received: by 10.220.122.37 with SMTP id j37mr161182vcr.214.1271358721132; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: {le} in xorlo From: Luke Bergen To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@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/33d26e8385fed297 X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/68dfb059023ef137 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016369c8da6f48e4c04844b4491 --0016369c8da6f48e4c04844b4491 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Completely off topic, but I've been looking for a place to ask and no opportunity has presented itself yet. lojbab, I keep seeing you use "^%)". What does it mean? On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Robert LeChevalier wrot= e: > Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote: > >> I don't share your fears, probably because of our different >> experiences with the language. >> >> You started learning Loglan when it was apparently drastically >> changing every month (from what you report). >> > > No. It wasn't changing all that fast. But it was inevitably changing > yet-again, and that was a deterrent to learning for many. > > > > You also went through a > >> relatively significant change in Lojban, the rafsi reallocation. >> > > It wasn't that significant, because only a small percentage of the rafsi > were changed, and very few people were at that stage using rafsi > constructively (it was in a sense premature to do the analysis with so > little usage, but if we had waited any longer, changes wouldn't have been > salable). Indeed, those rafsi that had seen significant usage were decid= ed > to be off-limits in the reallocation, so that IIRC roughly half the > proposals were voted down for that reason alone. > > gadri, by contrast, affect nearly every Lojban sentence, which is why you= r > proposal to change them met such resistance until us oldie's were promise= d > that it wouldn't significantly change existing text/usage (which made it > palatable but harder to understand) > > > The kind of changes you fear simply do not exist. >> > > People rarely see those who drop out because something changed. It shows > up when we talk to people who have been active and are no more. I made m= uch > more effort to talk to such people in the early years. > > > > Maybe this is thanks to your obstinate conservatism, > > In part ^%), but obviously it hasn't been me the last 8 years. > > > maybe only in part thanks to that, but >> the "pull the rug under your feet" kind of changes simply don't exist. >> > > For Nora, xorlo has been just such a change. She doesn't feel like she > understands the language anymore, in some fundamental way. I won't claim= it > has been for me - you have occasionally, if not often enough, seen me pos= t > or respond to something in Lojban. > > > In fact, all this nonsense about "Are you using xorlo mod 2 or xorlo >> mod 1?", if it exists at all, is instigated by comments like yours, >> that suggest that something of ponderous magnitude is going on that >> one must learn about. >> > > Actually, I read that suggestion into Lindar's comment that you responded > to, which is why I made the comment. (I had been about to say something > entirely different than you said, in response to him.) I repeat the relev= ant > comments: > >> 2. zo'e !=3D lo. I have no idea where you folks got the idea, but AFAIK >> >> "zo'e" is not "lo broda" or anything like that, it is simply an >> unspecified sumti, and therefore we don't need a new sumti "zo'e'e" or >> >> any such thing. It's not a particular unspecified thing, it isn't a >> specific unspecified thing, and it's not a thing which really is or >> isn't or is called an unspecified thing, it's just an unspecified >> sumti. >> > ... > > ((Sub-note: If this is wrong, then this is how a non-techy, non- >> linguist, non-intelligent audio engineer has perceived how these two >> gadri work, and it's clsn/Timo/ARJ that are to blame for teaching me >> incorrectly.)) >> > ... > > 5. Frankly, I could give less than two shits what some Uni professor's >> opinion of Lojban is or what some obnoxious person that I've never >> seen on IRC or the mailing list (which leads me to assume they speak >> little to no Lojban/haven't studied Lojban and read one article >> somebody else wrote and immediately formed an opinion) before thinks >> regarding the logical-ness of Lojban, and I think that as soon as we >> please the bureaucrats regarding the broken bits of Lojban, we should >> stop griping about every little damn thing and >> > ... > > Now I shall promptly head back into IRC to have "voi" >> explained to me another 20 times and "ce'u" another 200. >> > > I read that as someone who is trying to use the language, and is rather f= ed > up with running across academic discussion suggesting that the language > should be different than it is. I responded to it, being rather sensitiz= ed > to the matter after years of leading the community, and attempting to > convince such people that the discussion was not a sign of impending chan= ge. > And xorlo DID "pull the rug from under my feet" with regard to making su= ch > reassurances, because it DID result from just such academic discussions > about a part of the language that most of us had felt was "good enough". > > But I've accepted that xorlo is now the status quo, and here we have a > discussion that seemed to indicate that xorlo isn't good enough, and you > need a new cmavo to make the definition "proper". > > > > I have tried to tell you in as many ways as I > >> can that nothing of any importance is going on, >> > > The volume of discussion the topic generates, is what gives the impressio= n > of importance. And it is volume coming from people like you who are > respected as experts in the language, which is why the perception can gro= w > that things are more unsettled than they are. > > That perception about the 1994-1997 discussions that went into CLL's gadr= i > sections were about changes to the language, would have been correct, > because xorlo is approved as an override to CLL. Is it an important chan= ge? > Some say no, but then Robin said it was sufficiently important that peop= le > were asking on IRC whether xorlo was being used. > > > > and that you can simply tune out of the whole discussion, > > I've done that for 12 years. But the discussion goes on, and someone new > just complained. I can't tune out people like him who are apparently usi= ng > the language on IRC. > > lojbab > > > -- > 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=3Den. > > --=20 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. --0016369c8da6f48e4c04844b4491 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Completely off topic, but I've been looking for a place to ask and no o= pportunity has presented itself yet.

lojbab, I keep seei= ng you use "^%)". = =A0What does it mean?

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Robert LeCh= evalier <lojbab@l= ojban.org> wrote:
Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote:
I don't share your fears, probably because of our different
experiences with the language.

You started learning Loglan when it was apparently drastically
changing every month (from what you report).

No. =A0It wasn't changing all that fast. =A0But it was inevitably chang= ing yet-again, and that was a deterrent to learning for many.


> You also went through a
relatively significant change in Lojban, the rafsi reallocation.

It wasn't that significant, because only a small percentage of the rafs= i were changed, and very few people were at that stage using rafsi construc= tively =A0(it was in a sense premature to do the analysis with so little us= age, but if we had waited any longer, changes wouldn't have been salabl= e). =A0Indeed, those rafsi that had seen significant usage were decided to = be off-limits in the reallocation, so that IIRC roughly half the proposals = were voted down for that reason alone.

gadri, by contrast, affect nearly every Lojban sentence, which is why your = proposal to change them met such resistance until us oldie's were promi= sed that it wouldn't significantly change existing text/usage (which ma= de it palatable but harder to understand)


The kind of changes you fear simply do not exist.

People rarely see those who drop out because something changed. =A0It shows= up when we talk to people who have been active and are no more. =A0I made = much more effort to talk to such people in the early years.


> Maybe this is thanks to your obstinate conservatism,

In part ^%), but obviously it hasn't been me the last 8 years.


maybe only in part thanks to that, but
the "pull the rug under your feet" kind of changes simply don'= ;t exist.

For Nora, xorlo has been just such a change. =A0She doesn't feel like s= he understands the language anymore, in some fundamental way. =A0I won'= t claim it has been for me - you have occasionally, if not often enough, se= en me post or respond to something in Lojban.


In fact, all this nonsense about "Are you using xorlo mod 2 or xorlo mod 1?", if it exists at all, is instigated by comments like yours, that suggest that something of ponderous magnitude is going on that
one must learn about.

Actually, I read that suggestion into Lindar's comment that you respond= ed to, which is why I made the comment. =A0(I had been about to say somethi= ng entirely different than you said, in response to him.) I repeat the rele= vant comments:
2. zo'e !=3D lo. I have no idea where you folks got the idea, but AFAIK=

"zo'e" is not "lo broda" or anything like that, it = is simply an
unspecified sumti, and therefore we don't need a new sumti "zo'= ;e'e" or

any such thing. It's not a particular unspecified thing, it isn't a=
specific unspecified thing, and it's not a thing which really is or
isn't or is called an unspecified thing, it's just an unspecified sumti.
...

((Sub-note: If this is wrong, then this is how a non-techy, non-
linguist, non-intelligent audio engineer has perceived how these two
gadri work, and it's clsn/Timo/ARJ that are to blame for teaching me incorrectly.))
...

5. Frankly, I could give less than two shits what some Uni professor's<= br> opinion of Lojban is or what some obnoxious person that I've never
seen on IRC or the mailing list (which leads me to assume they speak
little to no Lojban/haven't studied Lojban and read one article
somebody else wrote and immediately formed an opinion) before thinks
regarding the logical-ness of Lojban, and I think that as soon as we
please the bureaucrats regarding the broken bits of Lojban, we should
stop griping about every little damn thing and
...

Now I shall promptly head back into IRC to have "voi"
explained to me another 20 times and "ce'u" another 200.

I read that as someone who is trying to use the language, and is rather fed= up with running across academic discussion suggesting that the language sh= ould be different than it is. =A0I responded to it, being rather sensitized= to the matter after years of leading the community, and attempting to conv= ince such people that the discussion was not a sign of impending change. = =A0And xorlo DID "pull the rug from under my feet" with regard to= making such reassurances, because it DID result from just such academic di= scussions about a part of the language that most of us had felt was "g= ood enough".

But I've accepted that xorlo is now the status quo, and here we have a = discussion that seemed to indicate that xorlo isn't good enough, and yo= u need a new cmavo to make the definition "proper".


> I have tried to tell you in as many ways as I
can that nothing of any importance is going on,

The volume of discussion the topic generates, is what gives the impression = of importance. =A0And it is volume coming from people like you who are resp= ected as experts in the language, which is why the perception can grow that= things are more unsettled than they are.

That perception about the 1994-1997 discussions that went into CLL's ga= dri sections were about changes to the language, would have been correct, b= ecause xorlo is approved as an override to CLL. =A0Is it an important chang= e? =A0Some say no, but then Robin said it was sufficiently important that p= eople were asking on IRC whether xorlo was being used.


> and that you can simply tune out of the whole discussion,

I've done that for 12 years. =A0But the discussion goes on, and someone= new just complained. =A0I can't tune out people like him who are appar= ently using the language on IRC.

lojbab


--
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.
--0016369c8da6f48e4c04844b4491--