From lojban+bncCMuAoImuBxD1rOjsBBoEKZsYiA@googlegroups.com Mon Apr 04 12:05:42 2011 Received: from mail-fx0-f61.google.com ([209.85.161.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Q6p5m-0004oX-74; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:05:41 -0700 Received: by fxm14 with SMTP id 14sf4570464fxm.16 for ; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:05:31 -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:date:message-id:subject:from: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=VFED969Jkfi4SreaUv12KyskGvsN6lSOmm9o8Q7vKIg=; b=CBBpDUiHxelOXStv3Ubm4QWr2BWyMJSSRHjoBDg49HNQv2nZ25JcQ/NvHZ3ZxIDabY lMziAa/h+ICjnuaLiaB/cTK2TOdv+xKmFsP5ZHhOBJCx2GIs7NbsomDXsGcZp5tvXYDs /dRwfF6LOmnQxMetUUiFvGagfdws4uMzlt3pE= 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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=IkEO6VbNGeul62bGLjzwF6CG1p3Vfq0vEG67dy3+TZKEayLpvUMwFqN5gzPl0p+sQr tzvIBAKOKQqQd3sjn85vih9PnNpFvdlOnEZBsuzgZtB/IiXYLGmD26VuA5lL8QU1jxDU Qs/oVXCUhp+z/FD8sUhDfUBdC+XGHcEiH1FR4= Received: by 10.223.158.70 with SMTP id e6mr798674fax.12.1301943925103; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:05:25 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.240.17 with SMTP id ky17ls2525318bkb.2.p; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.10.86 with SMTP id o22mr998042bko.18.1301943924135; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.10.86 with SMTP id o22mr998041bko.18.1301943924090; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f45.google.com (mail-bw0-f45.google.com [209.85.214.45]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o19si951235bkw.7.2011.04.04.12.05.24 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jtorndorff@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.45 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.45; Received: by mail-bw0-f45.google.com with SMTP id 16so4896386bwz.32 for ; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:05:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.20.70 with SMTP id e6mr6849918bkb.145.1301943923900; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:05:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.117.129 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 12:05:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <0a74da06-07cf-4b52-a329-ed0ebbae2f5b@u8g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 15:05:23 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] I love Lojban's approach, but what's the deal with place tags? From: Jameson Orndorff To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jtorndorff@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jtorndorff@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.45 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jtorndorff@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=00032555818a1a01c104a01c71cc --00032555818a1a01c104a01c71cc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I think the idea is that if you know the grammar, you should be able to understand what is being said, regardless of dialect. As long as what you are saying is correct, does it matter in what style you say it? And I am one of those who tends towards the terminator-centric part, but don't shy away from {cu} like some others do. I just feel it's another tool in the box. My qualms with {cu} come far more from a teaching perspective, where I feel that it's relied upon too heavily, and it becomes a crutch that leads to sloppy terminator use - but I'm digressing here. I guess what I should say is that learning lojban is quite often a rather substantial paradigm shift in the way you think about language. I would actually consider your dual-language upbringing as a bonus! Run with it, and use it to adapt yourself to better learning lojban. We are always here to help. mi'e .kribacr. mu'o On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Michael Turniansky wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Joel T. wrote: > >> In any case, surely running two systems side-by-side is asking for >> dialectisation (is that a word?), where speakers in one area get used >> to one system while speakers in another prefer the other? >> > > It can, and does. But we consider the flexibility to be a plus. That > way, any person coming from a natural language background of say, Turkish, > can from sentences the way that seems most natural to them, while someone > coming from an English background can form setnences the most natural way to > them. And both will be understood equally well. We had, for example, a > while a back, a discussion over which was "better": to use "cu" often, or to > totally eschew it in favor of sumti that are competely terminated so that > there was no need for it (i.e. "lo gerku cu barda" vs. "lo gerku ku > barda"). There are vocal proponents on each side, so it amounts to a > dialectical split, but.. so what? > --gejyspa > > > -- > 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. --00032555818a1a01c104a01c71cc Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think the idea is that if you know the grammar, you should be able to und= erstand what is being said, regardless of dialect. As long as what you are = saying is correct, does it matter in what style you say it?

And I am= one of those who tends towards the terminator-centric part, but don't = shy away from {cu} like some others do. I just feel it's another tool i= n the box. My qualms with {cu} come far more from a teaching perspective, w= here I feel that it's relied upon too heavily, and it becomes a crutch = that leads to sloppy terminator use - but I'm digressing here.

I guess what I should say is that learning lojban is quite often a rath= er substantial paradigm shift in the way you think about language. I would = actually consider your dual-language upbringing as a bonus! Run with it, an= d use it to adapt yourself to better learning lojban.

We are always here to help.

mi'e .kribacr. mu'o

=
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Michael Turnians= ky <mturnians= ky@gmail.com> wrote:


On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Joel T. <j= oelofarabia@gmail.com> wrote:
In any case, surely running two syste= ms side-by-side is asking for
dialectisation (is that a word?), where sp= eakers in one area get used
to one system while speakers in another prefer the other?
<= /div>

=A0 It can, and does.=A0 But we consider the flexibility to = be a plus.=A0 That way, any person coming from a natural language backgroun= d of say, Turkish, can from sentences the way that seems most natural to th= em, while someone coming from an English background can form setnences the = most natural way to them.=A0 And both will be understood equally well.=A0 W= e had, for example, a while a back, a discussion over which was "bette= r": to use "cu" often, or to totally eschew it in favor of s= umti that are competely terminated so that there was no need for it (i.e. &= quot;lo gerku cu barda" vs. "lo gerku ku barda").=A0 There a= re vocal proponents on each side, so it amounts to a dialectical split, but= .. so what?
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 --gejyspa
=A0

--
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@googlegrou= ps.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.
--00032555818a1a01c104a01c71cc--