From lojban+bncCMHEmaCOBhCitJTpBBoEII4RmA@googlegroups.com Wed Jan 05 17:26:09 2011 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Paec9-0007Xw-L3; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 17:26:09 -0800 Received: by gxk19 with SMTP id 19sf15018568gxk.16 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 17:25:59 -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=4DxIHfXwQAHWt4o5tSa0jZLSCmEl2Q3XWTvIbSRSFRI=; b=lzAQuv3tyD/jEv4E6aMcHSsSuBQRssOrFJxNBGrRTZNvHR7SG4FrEMpEuqjp5TzH/0 QJu7a35XZ+kbFBj3mJH29fVO7UL/K9oSxZQq8ocvLjKQgIJ0imdQrr0FLflcZjZA88xF AkAfgWIaIAiJQcMt4qSb+6GYh19/QNAxOZ1U8= 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=M/xkrU7T82XjA8vQ00h5CiKvAgUB2Benw2aCx/JI14kw0ol99Z4H0nQXRxnNsmjJJI nNYEQH7RmjFBA8NuhBeMcRA2JwneTinI7rjPrg3cQX3vb4gwT/FFjKnuXxqbS7UngYqz t/KcCXlJcK3RaTuKLSZOje5BPNFkBb1SpmPcM= Received: by 10.150.72.10 with SMTP id u10mr1639964yba.81.1294277154811; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 17:25:54 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.141.220 with SMTP id n28ls4086335ibu.0.p; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 17:25:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.200.129 with SMTP id ew1mr3074452ibb.0.1294277154181; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 17:25:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.200.129 with SMTP id ew1mr3074451ibb.0.1294277154100; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 17:25:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f180.google.com (mail-iy0-f180.google.com [209.85.210.180]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id j25si5309190ibb.0.2011.01.05.17.25.53; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 17:25:53 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.180 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.180; Received: by mail-iy0-f180.google.com with SMTP id 12so15956894iyi.11 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 17:25:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.35.68 with SMTP id o4mr7657971ibd.118.1294277152931; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 17:25:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.199.140 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:25:52 -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: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 18:25:52 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Lojban is *NOT* broken! Stop saying that! From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.180 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@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=00032555145af1023604992361c2 --00032555145af1023604992361c2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Ivo Doko wrote: > 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 = only >> 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 represente= d >> 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 >> will >> 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 > words for things they don't have a word for. What I'm talking about is th= at > 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 hav= e > 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 "sof= tware" > got incorporated into Serbo-Croatian as "ekran" and "softver". Sure, puri= sts > didn't like that and invented replacement words, namely "zaslon" and > "omek=C5=A1je", respectively, but those words are simply not used and hav= e 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 t= o > leave the language's unambiguity intact, but people who don't care about > whether the language is completely unambiguous or not (who would, mind yo= u, > 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 o= f > 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 puris= ts > 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 m= ake > such a fascistic language the world's official common language and even i= f > they did no one would give a crap what the committee says and lojban woul= d > still be what is spoken and not what is approved. > Lojban is a proscribed language. So, call it fascist if you want, but that'= s exactly how it works: it the BPFK doesn't approve it, it isn't Lojban. Of course, we don't even really need the BPFK for something like borrowed words - the grammar itself does most of the "what-is-and-is-not-lojban" all on it's own, and no one who fluently speaks Lojban (such as, for example, native speakers) would purposely invent a word that doesn't follow Lojban grammar rules. --=20 mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu d= o zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) --=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. --00032555145af1023604992361c2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Ivo Doko <ivo.doko@gmail.com= > wrote:
On 6 January 2011 00:27, Jim C= arter <jimc@math.ucla.edu> 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 native= 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 intro= duced 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 incorpo= rate that word in their vocabularies and, thus, in lojban. It's just li= ke French "=C3=A9cran" and English "software" got incor= porated into Serbo-Croatian as "ekran" and "softver". S= ure, purists didn't like that and invented replacement words, namely &q= uot;zaslon" and "omek=C5=A1je", respectively, but those word= s are simply not used and have failed to replace "ekran" and &quo= t;softver" and these two have become a part of Serbo-Croatian vocabula= ry. Same thing would happen with lojban - purists would invent lujvo (or br= ivla) to replace the direct loanwords in order to leave the language's = unambiguity intact, but people who don't care about whether the languag= e is completely unambiguous or not (who would, mind you, make up a great ma= jority of lojban speakers if it did become world's official common lang= uage) 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 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.

Lojban is a proscribed language. So, cal= l it fascist if you want, but that's exactly how it works: it the BPFK = doesn't approve it, it isn't Lojban.

Of course, we don't= even really need the BPFK for something like borrowed words - the grammar = itself does most of the "what-is-and-is-not-lojban" all on it'= ;s own, and no one who fluently speaks Lojban (such as, for example, native= speakers) would purposely invent a word that doesn't follow Lojban gra= mmar rules.

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le= bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to= the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
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.
--00032555145af1023604992361c2--