From lojban+bncCOjSjrXVGBDKy-zsBBoEZKoATQ@googlegroups.com Tue Apr 05 07:23:23 2011 Received: from mail-yw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.213.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Q77A6-00023V-SX; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:23:23 -0700 Received: by ywg8 with SMTP id 8sf896859ywg.16 for ; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:23:13 -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=79USpyamyroM0PEXD+xF4AmQ+4Q5yCaWCKm9DZpvMBg=; b=0qzTLYhEmwAjQf76ZocABxJIohcpahR8Ymtv4f+vGwTrPO03eyyBBlgkbIM1+u6lAv uRsf5vsC2qc+a3ADR1XzsrBy7kbsBzwTaBn0dz4Es/r9cUZFUa+15E3CrMtXn5izYThh 3YXZ+VUGyfdp8p2gwuQLNheMHdDVqIi7mbVnY= 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=zWCKqDK7U1mMVb5qlAkOrbyAKPaqIZWgdFfdNawl2Q65V8ZhAb0QIiPZHDEVLTdugw bkg/JZg7x6lmDyr1Lm5i8ZqboFcXWBOvD61Vl4jIRpxnwN1JUWUgu9A3uQFfsq5eAIZN A7OK4EPpMRNuuAgPLrOef4TQDcuH9xbncSauk= Received: by 10.150.209.19 with SMTP id h19mr146316ybg.7.1302013386661; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:23:06 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.1.79 with SMTP id 15ls4862864ibe.0.p; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.148.199 with SMTP id s7mr992517icv.23.1302013385452; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.148.199 with SMTP id s7mr992516icv.23.1302013385412; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f170.google.com (mail-iw0-f170.google.com [209.85.214.170]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id xk8si1050415icb.1.2011.04.05.07.23.05 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.170; Received: by iwn3 with SMTP id 3so508947iwn.29 for ; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.123.141 with SMTP id p13mr8921336ibr.29.1302013385125; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:23:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.37.10 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 07:22:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <0a74da06-07cf-4b52-a329-ed0ebbae2f5b@u8g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> From: Luke Bergen Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 10:22:45 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: I love Lojban's approach, but what's the deal with place tags? 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 209.85.214.170 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=0016e6476306502e3e04a02c9dc4 --0016e6476306502e3e04a02c9dc4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Yeah Joel, I think what you're missing at this early stage in your learning is that both FA *and* knowing the place structures are extremely important if you want to be fluent. I understand your concerns. You agreed that I was representing your argument accurately. What you may have misunderstood was that my last paragraph about "if one group of people liked the place structure.... been dropped out of the language by this group)" was mildly sarcastic. The idea of a group of people using lojban and simply forgetting/dropping FA and/or the default place structure of the gismu is completely absurd. It could happen, but it would take (my guess) centuries of shifting for that to happen. It's so fundamental to a proper understanding of the language that if anyone dropped FA or began forgetting the place structures, I would argue that it was darn-near a completely different language. I'd put it on par with English switching to a system more like what they have in Turkey (as you describe it). Such a thing would be (at best) an extremely bastardized version of English. Likewise, lojban without FA would be quite a stretch. On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Joel T. wrote: > That was my point exactly. True fluency means completely internalizing > a language so that the words just flow out of your mouth without > thinking. You're completely "out of the book" to use a chess > expression. And a community of truly fluent people would be influenced > more by each other than any conscious thought given to the official > rules of grammar. A true Sapir-Whorf test would demand nothing less. > > The point I'm making about running two systems side-by-side is that in > any community of truly fluent people, either one of them would get > phased out, or they would diverge in meaning, usage, connotation etc. > At the very least it would become a way of differentiating between > cliques, which is the thin end of the wedge for dialectisation. You > just can't have two ways of doing exactly the same thing with only > whim to choose between them. It's great in class, but in the field > it's not tenable. It's not how language works. > > On Apr 4, 10:04 pm, Luke Bergen wrote: > > I think his point was that these dialectic splits could result in two > groups > > of people not being able to understand one another. > > > > If one group of people liked using the place structure so much that they > > just ignored FA what would happen if they saw something like {fi lo zdani > cu > > klama fa mi lo zarci} and got completely confused (you know, cuz > generations > > later FA would have basically been dropped out of the language by this > > group). > > > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Michael Turniansky < > mturnian...@gmail.com>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. > > -- 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. --0016e6476306502e3e04a02c9dc4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yeah Joel, I think what you're missing at this early stage in your lear= ning is that both FA and=A0knowing the place structures are extremel= y important if you want to be fluent.

I understand your = concerns. =A0You agreed that I was representing your argument accurately. = =A0What you may have misunderstood was that my last paragraph about "i= f one group of people liked the place structure.... been dropped out of the= language by this group)" was mildly sarcastic.

The idea of a group of people using lojban and simply f= orgetting/dropping FA and/or the default place structure of the gismu is co= mpletely absurd. =A0It could happen, but it would take (my guess) centuries= of shifting for that to happen. =A0It's so fundamental to a proper und= erstanding of the language that if anyone dropped FA or began forgetting th= e place structures, I would argue that it was darn-near a completely differ= ent language.

I'd put it on par with English switching to a syste= m more like what they have in Turkey (as you describe it). =A0Such a thing = would be (at best) an extremely bastardized version of English. =A0Likewise= , lojban without FA would be quite a stretch.

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Joel T. <joelofarabia@gm= ail.com> wrote:
That was my point exactly. True fluency means completely internalizing
a language so that the words just flow out of your mouth without
thinking. You're completely "out of the book" to use a chess<= br> expression. And a community of truly fluent people would be influenced
more by each other than any conscious thought given to the official
rules of grammar. A true Sapir-Whorf test would demand nothing less.

The point I'm making about running two systems side-by-side is that in<= br> any community of truly fluent people, either one of them would get
phased out, or they would diverge in meaning, usage, connotation etc.
At the very least it would become a way of differentiating between
cliques, which is the thin end of the wedge for dialectisation. You
just can't have two ways of doing exactly the same thing with only
whim to choose between them. It's great in class, but in the field
it's not tenable. It's not how language works.

On Apr 4, 10:04=A0pm, Luke Bergen <lukeaber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think his point was that these dialectic splits could result in two = groups
> of people not being able to understand one another.
>
> If one group of people liked using the place structure so much that th= ey
> just ignored FA what would happen if they saw something like {fi lo zd= ani cu
> klama fa mi lo zarci} and got completely confused (you know, cuz gener= ations
> later FA =A0would have basically been dropped out of the language by t= his
> group).
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Michael Turniansky <mturnian...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Joel T. <joelofara...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> In any case, surely running two systems side-by-side is askin= g for
> >> dialectisation (is that a word?), where speakers in one area = get used
> >> to one system while speakers in another prefer the other?
>
> > =A0 It can, and does. =A0But we consider the flexibility to be a = plus. =A0That
> > 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 nat= ural way to
> > them. =A0And both will be understood equally well. =A0We 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"). =A0There are vocal proponents on each side, so it a= mounts to a
> > dialectical split, but.. so what?
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0--gejyspa
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Googl= e Groups
> > "lojban" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > lojban+u= nsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
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.
--0016e6476306502e3e04a02c9dc4--