From 3hWvHSwYKBgQpsnfefpsnfer.svkpsnferksskpikvsytw.gsq@groups.bounces.google.com Thu Apr 15 12:40:21 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f141.google.com ([209.85.210.141]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3hWvHSwYKBgQpsnfefpsnfer.svkpsnferksskpikvsytw.gsq@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1O2Uv3-0002rB-UV; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:40:19 -0700 Received: by yxe5 with SMTP id 5sf1222971yxe.2 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:40:03 -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:received:x-vr-score :x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score:message-id:date:from:user-agent :x-accept-language:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-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=2J0lkUTbhzDHd4S+tYBO93CXZdQGOTeqotzNDPLK0/E=; b=CZC14dcit3urYSQmn/pf+hW8s0iOdIUYVtwtrRq56UhUWYcCClXGZ+feTLTuxqJOvt J5TkvZiOFxfVsRCeDBf3K4z23ccbraUOgM8Vk7yRTP968P3LOuRRNbgapqkZ6mw/+jbc 97icwZOQzRYsh4VY6a7LMGnfPb5qgIz8tiVBM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-vr-score:x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score :message-id:date:from:user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-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=mNnuOlykpFi7xFXndQ0qeoJUR1L24AK09ce7oQKx58TK3CEMADuIM/uOkdD83RTzgJ RotLol229k9nIFdGCmn1A7eYye/dnAnUq02mj6OisVsHDxJgilqoN9QrXk1uOOEPRtOi iUo1FYE5yDXC4UwyONBoiNQZ57NeG5Y2jevB8= Received: by 10.91.181.11 with SMTP id i11mr183632agp.0.1271360389868; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:39:49 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.91.91.8 with SMTP id t8ls240616agl.2.p; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:39:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.91.49.14 with SMTP id b14mr276249agk.14.1271360388362; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.91.49.14 with SMTP id b14mr276248agk.14.1271360388320; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eastrmmtao101.cox.net (eastrmmtao101.cox.net [68.230.240.7]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 25si193145ywh.15.2010.04.15.12.39.48; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.240.7 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.240.7; Received: from eastrmimpo03.cox.net ([68.1.16.126]) by eastrmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP id <20100415193948.KQKA14747.eastrmmtao101.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net> for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:39:48 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([70.187.225.124]) by eastrmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp id 5vfm1e00G2hfrC602vfneT; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:39:47 -0400 X-VR-Score: -100.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=garkv6WxUlWCZxlYffz6yNGlDVHTZyAXTUdcTJEJ4sc= c=1 sm=1 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=lsg66w07okjF3vGJL2g+Jw==:17 a=AZ56E4umuF3A3RgROssA:9 a=rvkDHZdLD7mzptHIRz8A:7 a=4soS4fQBdiaf9MkSZpMKO2H5f7cA:4 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=m69R2zsIUpfofobg:21 a=A80zFKhNbBvqsmQz:21 a=lsg66w07okjF3vGJL2g+Jw==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <4BC76B7F.2050000@lojban.org> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:39:43 -0400 From: Robert LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: {le} in xorlo References: <4BBE188B.8070807@lojban.org> <448505.50300.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <201585.79379.qm@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <201004132253.05621.phma@phma.optus.nu> <4a02d723-a934-434a-b626-0a3a9fbf803f@u22g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <4a02d723-a934-434a-b626-0a3a9fbf803f@u22g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 68.230.240.7 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org 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/31021152da9e1380 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Lindar wrote: > 4. Why can't we use a common-sense rule? I see things like plibu > (generic word for external genitalia) and vlagi (word for vulva > [female external genitalia])... so we have an obvious redundancy and > consistency flaw (being that we have a consistency set up from remna > to pinji to ganti regarding gender specification. Get rid of vlagi. There was an explicit decision made NOT to eliminate redundancy in the gismu list. There were lots of reasons, including that such consistency wasn't a design consideration. anti-sexism got involved in this particular case; the opinions of the few women involved in the project got especial respect when it came to making sure we had the words needed to talk about such things. (Laaden had an influence on the language design at one point, and the UIs you dislike are another fallout of that influence.) > It's -extremely- obvious stuff like that which we need to just remove. No. It is stuff that you don't think you need, that you don't use. Removing things is not something we want to consider. > Another, yet different, example is of "mabla" wherein nobody (of whom > I know) uses the standard definition (something like "x1 is a > derogative use of x2" or something stupid like that), and pretty much > everybody else uses it as a swear (x1 is stupid/bad/detestable/shitty/ > etc.), so why don't we just skip formalities and change the > definition? You are making an argument from usage %^) That may happen some day. Now is not the time. > I'm sorry that I don't have too much insight on the issue > of cmavo, but the one that apparently has held the byfy back several > years or whatever I fail to see as a problem. "Without intent" is my > strongly believed and fully uninformed definition of ".ai nai". There can be an informed definition, but I think this one is arising from someone else who (like you with vlagi) sees an inconsistency and wants to fix it. It isn't necessary. > Honestly, I mabla-ing hate most UI in the first place (mostly because > they're overused and made endlessly complex by newbies using > ru'ecaisaise'iwhatever so I know precisely how happy/annoyed you are > on a scale of one to a thousand including decimal places into the > millionths, They are exploring an aspect of the language that fascinates them, and which is very different from most natlangs. It may not be something that interests you, but everyone has their own interests. > but I have no idea what they're actually trying to say > because they forgot to use a damn gadri and accidentally a whole > tanru), Maybe they weren't trying to express a predicate relationship or identify a "thing", but merely to express their emotions in a way that they cannot in other languages. One would think that someone like you who apparently want to see more art and music usage of Lojban would find the attitudinals important. Not only to they suit the emotive expressiveness of the arts, but their usages tends to be more malleable to fit into a rhythm or other poetic structure than the strictly-penultimate-stressed brivla. > They have absolutely no practical use other than being a stupid toy ci'o do mabla leka kelci Others don't consider art to have any "practical use", and would view your urge to have people participate in the art and music and video community, the way you view their choice to use UI > I'd work on simplifying some of the language for > stupid people like myself as I still have absolutely -no- idea what > "ce'u" does, what "pseudo-quantifier binding a variable within an > abstraction that represents an open place." or 'lambda' is supposed to > mean, I can't help you there. When I teach that stuff, I do it by example, not by trying to explain it. It isn't all that hard, if you don't try to understand the formalities. In the case of ce'u, it is about filling in the places of words that have "leka" in their place structure, and sometimes other abstractors. The leka abstraction has at least one place therein which has the value of another sumti in the bridi relationship, and ce'u identifies which one. Defining it allows people to be precise, while speaking in a natural fashion (because in many cases you can leave the ce'u out). The logicians who use the technical terminology are trying to decide the hard cases before someone asks about them, and there are some hard cases. In the case of ce'u there is an entire subbranch of math called lambda calculus that deals with such hard cases, and it shows up in programming language design as well. > and I'm scared to death of anything I haven't learned that is > apparently "non-veridical" because I read in the dictionary that it > means something like "a lie", which clearly means I have no > understanding of what the hell it means or how to use it (like "voi"). In real life language use, people use words to mean things other than their strict denotation. Lojban allows someone to make that distinction explicit When "The White House announced yesterday that ...", it is not the case that any blabi zdani expressed anything. It was rather a person or bureaucracy issuing the announcement, and "The White House" is being used as a non-veridical descriptor of that announcement issuer. If you look at usage in natlangs a lot, you'll find this sort of thing crops up all over the place. The classic Loglan/Lojban example might refer to a transvestite saying: le ninmu cu nanmu. The transvestite isn't really a woman, but is being described as one. It isn't "lying", just "conveniently describing". One cannot see a mathematical point or measure a 0-dimensional moment, so almost all English usages of "point" or "moment" are non-veridical. If you tell someone to wait a moment, the moment is up before they have processed the language. "mokca" will usually be used for a somewhat longer but relatively short period of time. And how does one make "true" statements about unicorns, elves, fairies? One doesn't, but describes them as such and relies on the listener's cultural knowledge and imagination to make it clear. 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=en.