From lojban+bncCPGMg4mHHBD3jZTpBBoEd6AXYA@googlegroups.com Wed Jan 05 16:04:21 2011 Received: from mail-vw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PadKz-0007mU-O6; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:04:21 -0800 Received: by vws1 with SMTP id 1sf8903150vws.16 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:04:10 -0800 (PST) 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:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=5zLtfNAy2R7cQ5PcFyl02kVYkio1v41f0u8WZmL1PO4=; b=Xd54rOMaBqB/zpcIXz7gj/6wpYK2jq/CE8RF8tEFo7E/XP4udbDWlvQfJr5G3iNH+G pcH7cpR9lgRXu7mNajv4SpM6MLWv1PCaSMH5jgdTC/2UJVKQ8lMeqk34WiuqnuBuMP7e 8nU2oq5X2bQMjhjVmF7DOm30BBC4N5Xdesco8= 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-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=sTPw29LiGYKNr8XStAyyUD4R0WOspyzJKW1T/e5CwyvtYSJ2Q1WJb8FQFCP3+2CVSp MWWtJkGwJR4Awko98Lhm3Q8vP2LTl6Tk8oXEduJL88SgZFHvJJYIu4oBhLZ2MhnphWMk S1IkvZGtt73Mam1ebYebqxaYOQzskDw7DL9vA= Received: by 10.220.183.4 with SMTP id ce4mr969139vcb.40.1294272247676; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:04:07 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.220.89.74 with SMTP id d10ls2114848vcm.5.p; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:04:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.179.129 with SMTP id bq1mr1351132vcb.11.1294272246937; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:04:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.179.129 with SMTP id bq1mr1351131vcb.11.1294272246905; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:04:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vw0-f46.google.com (mail-vw0-f46.google.com [209.85.212.46]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id f21si2096141vbs.0.2011.01.05.16.04.05; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:04:05 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of ivo.doko@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.46 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.46; Received: by vws16 with SMTP id 16so6358027vws.33 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:04:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.201.2 with SMTP id ey2mr2815892vcb.69.1294272245725; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:04:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.176.71 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 16:04:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <9114501.161.1294150198377.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqhy19> <20110105165231.GK17534@digitalkingdom.org> <201101051658.16043.phma@phma.optus.nu> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 01:04:05 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Lojban is *NOT* broken! Stop saying that! From: Ivo Doko To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: ivo.doko@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of ivo.doko@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.46 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=ivo.doko@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba53a2fa72fb150499223d01 --90e6ba53a2fa72fb150499223d01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 6 January 2011 00:27, Jim Carter wrote: > I haven't been doing too much lately with Lojban, but back in the Loglan > days I translated about 10,000 words of text into Loglan while creating o= nly > four new brivla (torus, to use in "bagel"; noodle; bear (the animal, > which wasn't in old Loglan); and oar). All the rest could be represented > by lujvo, if I looked carefully in the word list. I expect that brivla > will be coined rarely once the language is "complete", but novel lujvo wi= ll > coruscate off the tongues of the lojbanistani. Particularly if we pay > attention to compatible definitions and reliable combining rules. > > I'm not talking about how lojban native speakers will come up with new word= s for things they don't have a word for. What I'm talking about is that speaker(s) of lojban will be introduced to a new invention/concept/thing which will have been named by people who don't speak lojban (but, for example, English) and lojban speakers will like the name those people have given it and will thus simply incorporate that word in their vocabularies and, thus, in lojban. It's just like French "=C3=A9cran" and English "softw= are" got incorporated into Serbo-Croatian as "ekran" and "softver". Sure, purist= s didn't like that and invented replacement words, namely "zaslon" and "omek=C5=A1je", respectively, but those words are simply not used and have = failed to replace "ekran" and "softver" and these two have become a part of Serbo-Croatian vocabulary. Same thing would happen with lojban - purists would invent lujvo (or brivla) to replace the direct loanwords in order to leave the language's unambiguity intact, but people who don't care about whether the language is completely unambiguous or not (who would, mind you, make up a great majority of lojban speakers if it did become world's official common language) would not cease to use the loanwords in place of the new "proper" words and lojban would get screwed up pretty quick. Of course, you could say that lojban is what a special committee of purists says it is and that people who don't use only the words which have been approved by the committee don't speak lojban, but no one would agree to mak= e such a fascistic language the world's official common language and even if they did no one would give a crap what the committee says and lojban would still be what is spoken and not what is approved. --=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. --90e6ba53a2fa72fb150499223d01 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 6 January 2011 00:27, Jim Carter <jimc@math.ucla.edu><= /span> wrote:
I haven't been doing too much lately with Lojban, but back in the Logla= n days I translated about 10,000 words of text into Loglan while creating o= nly four new brivla (torus, to use in "bagel"; noodle; bear (the = animal,
which wasn't in old Loglan); and oar). =C2=A0All the rest could be repr= esented
by lujvo, if I looked carefully in the word list. =C2=A0I expect that brivl= a
will be coined rarely once the language is "complete", but novel = lujvo will
coruscate off the tongues of the lojbanistani. =C2=A0Particularly if we pay=
attention to compatible definitions and reliable combining rules.


I'm not talking about how lojban n= ative speakers will come up with new words for things they don't have a= word for. What I'm talking about is that speaker(s) of lojban will be = introduced to a new invention/concept/thing which will have been named by p= eople who don't speak lojban (but, for example, English) and lojban spe= akers will like the name those people have given it and will thus simply in= corporate that word in their vocabularies and, thus, in lojban. It's ju= st like French "=C3=A9cran" and English "software" got = incorporated into Serbo-Croatian as "ekran" and "softver&quo= t;. Sure, purists didn't like that and invented replacement words, name= ly "zaslon" and "omek=C5=A1je", respectively, but those= words are simply not used and have failed to replace "ekran" and= "softver" and these two have become a part of Serbo-Croatian voc= abulary. Same thing would happen with lojban - purists would invent lujvo (= or brivla) to replace the direct loanwords in order to leave the language&#= 39;s unambiguity intact, but people who don't care about whether the la= nguage is completely unambiguous or not (who would, mind you, make up a gre= at majority of lojban speakers if it did become world's official common= language) would not cease to use the loanwords in place of the new "p= roper" words and lojban would get screwed up pretty quick.

Of course, you could say that lojban is what a special committee of pur= ists says it is and that people who don't use only the words which have= been approved by the committee don't speak lojban, but no one would ag= ree to make such a fascistic language the world's official common langu= age and even if they did no one would give a crap what the committee says a= nd lojban would still be what is spoken and not what is approved.

--
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.
--90e6ba53a2fa72fb150499223d01--