From lojban+bncCOjSjrXVGBCu5t7tBBoEkg3aug@googlegroups.com Tue Apr 26 23:10:06 2011 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QExwn-0001yx-2Q; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:10:06 -0700 Received: by wwb13 with SMTP id 13sf2051872wwb.16 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:09:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version :in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=3A5xCMtWygmpkkr6Z5mqK+xxwvt0ekWU1E1tZI8MIQE=; b=ZE/pHs0oN0ZMz9I0MjJRfb8II0cIEjPzkAK8OxSgRYqMZSWjlqEcFsexHVqx+dYaZI fscLHapaFgGWsG6w8ag8gGVxUuDuIQgxj+77zYZb3ho3m+aKQpWoNULexULe6vEGv4iA pvMyPAc8k3QWVD2Vr76xB3zn64IdxIU3eVyec= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=FiwM+wTrLysRb8BHyuwpm0nQEks6EvpOGjZl6pMwulzJnPHnKjhiYTV9UNYfJEQije sBvZVbekSSSqg4Qc+deuqlNb1NdA9gPgkL3WRwhXdf1/6Zt/7Om7xa1rh0ShB4e9PGFo N/w5z+4gPVIfvVB7zw9tVps9ib/fiWpT1LuqM= Received: by 10.216.71.198 with SMTP id r48mr524052wed.24.1303884590664; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:09:50 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.14.25.139 with SMTP id z11ls43718eez.0.gmail; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.47.205 with SMTP id t53mr148936eeb.28.1303884589431; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.47.205 with SMTP id t53mr148935eeb.28.1303884589403; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ew0-f53.google.com (mail-ew0-f53.google.com [209.85.215.53]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l15si158998eei.7.2011.04.26.23.09.49 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.53 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.53; Received: by ewy8 with SMTP id 8so458280ewy.12 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.53.134 with SMTP id g6mr712779eec.6.1303884589126; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:09:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.29.4 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:09:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <29de23a7-9c3b-439e-8bc7-57748489baa7@z37g2000vbl.googlegroups.com> From: Luke Bergen Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 02:09:28 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Lettorals To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cdff82ac355ff04a1e049bc --000e0cdff82ac355ff04a1e049bc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Haha. If it's better then evolutionary pressure would make it happen. That's why walking is better than flying in a jet in every way. Evolutionary processes in biology and in linguistics are lazy. And yes, English *allows* you to be unambiguous and clear but the fact that it also allows the lazy speaker to be ambiguous and confusing is a flaw in the language. I'm confused how you can go through that explanation of what it was that mabel sold and say "see, nice and easy" but then gejyspa's explanation of "it's a pronoun for whatever last started with that letter" is "messy and confusing". My only recommendation, practice. I have a strong suspicion that a lojbanist learning english would have a harder time understanding enlgish pronouns than a native english speaker trying to understand lojban anaphora. Just because it's not your first language doesn't make it inherently messy and complicated. On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Ivo Doko wrote: > On 27 April 2011 06:35, Luke Bergen wrote: > > In what universe is that in any way better than > > the pronoun system that we have in lojban? > > In ours apparently, because otherwise linguistic evolutionary pressure > would be different and thus would drive the evolution of natural > languages differently. > > > > In fact, one thing that's been really pissing me off about english lately > is > > the inability to refer to a human being with a personal pronoun that > doesn't > > imply a particular gender. The best I've been able to come up with is > > "friend". Every other personal pronoun/name-functioning-as-pronoun in > > english implies a gender ("buddy, guy, dude, sir, dad, grandpa, etc..." > are > > all clearly male.) > > "Person". > > > > "after putting the disk in the cabinet, Mabel sold it." > > Missing the context. Without it, the only reasonable supposition is > that "it" refers to the cabinet, because in order to sell the disk > without the cabinet would require taking the disk out of the cabinet > again in order to give it to the purchaser, which makes the first part > of the sentence pointless. It's the same reasoning by which the > reference of "they" in > > "Monkeys were fed bananas because they were ripe." > > and > > "Monkeys were fed bananas because they were hungry." > > is unambiguous to humans. > > > -- > mu'o mi'e .ivan. > > -- > 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. > > -- 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. --000e0cdff82ac355ff04a1e049bc Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Haha. =A0If it's better then evolutionary pressure would make it happen= . =A0That's why walking is better than flying in a jet in every way. = =A0Evolutionary processes in biology and in linguistics are lazy.

<= /div>
And yes, English allows=A0you to be unambiguous and clear but t= he fact that it also allows the lazy speaker to be ambiguous and confusing = is a flaw in the language.

I'm confused how yo= u can go through that explanation of what it was that mabel sold and say &q= uot;see, nice and easy" but then gejyspa's explanation of "it= 's a pronoun for whatever last started with that letter" is "= messy and confusing". =A0My only=A0recommendation, practice. =A0I have= a strong suspicion that a lojbanist learning english would have a harder t= ime understanding enlgish pronouns than a native english speaker trying to = understand lojban anaphora. =A0Just because it's not your first languag= e doesn't make it=A0inherently=A0messy and complicated.

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Ivo Doko <ivo.doko@gmail.co= m> wrote:
On 27 April 2011 06:35, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> In what universe is that in any way better than
> the pronoun system that we have in lojban?

In ours apparently, because otherwise linguistic evolutionary pressur= e
would be different and thus would drive the evolution of natural
languages differently.


> In fact, one thing that's been really pissing me off about english= lately is
> the inability to refer to a human being with a personal pronoun that d= oesn't
> imply a particular gender. =A0The best I've been able to come up w= ith is
> "friend". =A0Every other personal pronoun/name-functioning-a= s-pronoun in
> english implies a gender ("buddy, guy, dude, sir, dad, grandpa, e= tc..." are
> all clearly male.)

"Person".


> "after putting the disk in the cabinet, Mabel sold it."

Missing the context. Without it, the only reasonable supposition is that "it" refers to the cabinet, because in order to sell the dis= k
without the cabinet would require taking the disk out of the cabinet
again in order to give it to the purchaser, which makes the first part
of the sentence pointless. It's the same reasoning by which the
reference of "they" in

"Monkeys were fed bananas because they were ripe."

and

"Monkeys were fed bananas because they were hungry."

is unambiguous to humans.


--
mu'o mi'e .ivan.

--
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@googlegroups.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.
--000e0cdff82ac355ff04a1e049bc--