From lojban+bncCNTM-bHNDhC3n__fBBoEh2WyLQ@googlegroups.com Fri May 28 07:14:33 2010 Received: from mail-vw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OI0KS-0005vz-Q2; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:32 -0700 Received: by vws11 with SMTP id 11sf258737vws.16 for ; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:21 -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:received-spf:received:date:from:to:subject :in-reply-to:message-id:references:user-agent:mime-version :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=3y0jWbfLhBWzYRSe6CRVVhoGrtBgW+V+FDITzJ21Bo8=; b=eWaWQrF1eE51wuBvysLBx4cQBaiebnDAZQWeDsD5nQ2XebGc2Be5FWQqwEiBbsaz8Y L7bJdCB85uvw1zzrszQhbbb9lb+h3FhENd1boeg5fdFB4jwEVe874nuVJrm1wj6GCZxS 6QcP4tyreEr06A8FmEs/WmTVaniH+73XF6akM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to :message-id:references:user-agent:mime-version :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=ogK4xn0AaG5N9HvCJNWlz3YHN4eAt0JLDyQrjVPL03ItzURv0d+3Z++JWLHhjVuXI9 ko94RuJKHQoLMORe/R41d/5zt+Y8G8WWujP0ETSKA+QgxPizTTQWJys0ABq57vccnclt b//pE+xu3F7gobCPQOeeSFHPITZZTh290bybg= Received: by 10.229.43.209 with SMTP id x17mr41003qce.0.1275056055423; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:15 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.210.31 with SMTP id gi31ls764166qcb.0.p; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.43.84 with SMTP id v20mr17829qae.2.1275056054370; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.149.200 with SMTP id u8mr19680ibv.1.1275055350549; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:02:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.149.200 with SMTP id u8mr19679ibv.1.1275055350516; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:02:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cec.wustl.edu (express.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.21.16]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id fa4si1754808ibb.3.2010.05.28.07.02.29; Fri, 28 May 2010 07:02:29 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 128.252.21.16 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of adam@pubcrawler.org) client-ip=128.252.21.16; Received: from grid.cec.wustl.edu (grid.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.20.97]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.cec.wustl.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 808191E8071; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:02:29 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 09:02:28 -0500 (CDT) From: "Adam D. Lopresto" To: lojban Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Named multiples In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <3414c7b0-2a75-4cb2-99a4-0afa6458f6ba@t34g2000prd.googlegroups.com> <7ac5ef76-747a-4077-ac8d-bd45e0c68005@y6g2000pra.googlegroups.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LRH 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 128.252.21.16 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of adam@pubcrawler.org) smtp.mail=adam@pubcrawler.org X-Original-Sender: adam@pubcrawler.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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On Thu, 27 May 2010, Lindar wrote: >> This argument is really vague. What does "irregular word-form" mean? >> What does "normally allowed" mean? Are you saying that this change >> would make there be too many pauses? > > lojbancanbereadasonebigstringwhichishowit'sheardinspeachsoifwesuddenlyintroducewordsthatCANendinconsonantsthenwefrackuptheabilitytopickoutwordsaccurately. How about learning the current Lojban morphology before attacking "changes" that don't actually change it one iota? Lojban can be unambiguously written without spaces only if stress and all mandatory stops are explicitly marked. The morphology algorithm breaks words apart and determines what words are of what type before the grammar has any say in anything. Changing where cmevla are *grammatical* does not affect the *morphology*. The grammar is only involved after the phoneme or text stream is broken into words by the morphology. >> If you're saying that this change could result in fu'ivla being >> abandoned altogether, why is that a bad thing? Specifically, what is >> it about cmevla-as-selbri that makes them good for the speaker but bad >> for the language? > > The case against long lujvo is moot. We create loanwords from our own > language when they become too long. Also, mitpavycinglepre is a really > stupid example as that isn't an accurate lujvo for 'homosexual', and > I'm quite offended by the idea that we have to have a word like that > in a more enlightened age where gender and sexuality are fluid enough > to warrant "nakni cinse", "fetsi cinse" and so on. I personally am > offended by the use of "mitpavycinglepre". And I am offended that after we come up with a huge set of words to precisely cover every part of the Venn diagram of possible human sexuality, you come in and express offense at the existence of a word for a particular part of that. > That aside, my point is that we create fu'ivla of exceptionally long > lujvo in an effort to keep them short. It's like the lojbanic version > of abbreviating things. That's really not done much at all (I first heard of it a few months ago), but it is a somewhat nifty approach. > We have a standard of phonological rules in Lojban. Everything ends in > a vowel, anything with two or more syllables has penultimate stress, > things have to have correct consonant clusters so they don't break > apart. There is an ordered and well-thought-out structure to every > single word, phrase, emphasis, and every other thing in the language. > The ONLY thing that ends in a consonant is a name, and so names become > easy to pick out due to the fact that we rarely use them in > conversation, and they sound nothing like the rest of the language. On > that mental parse tree, if we used "xorla", I would now have to stop > and question every single cmevla to check whether or not it's being > used as a selbri. Again, this doesn't change the morphology at all. cmevla are defined and identified exactly as before, they just also are grammatically valid in other places. > If we restricted cmevla selbri to ONLY being "x1 is named/called...", > then I would agree full-tilt with this proposal. If that doesn't work > with everybody else, then can we at least put -some- restrictions on > them? Perhaps that they're restricted to being single place selbri? > > =D We can call my proposal "linla" in honour of xorxes. ((zo'o)) > > -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ And entropy continued to increase. -- 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.