From lojban+bncCJzE7b_XFxCj17TuBBoEvH4X-A@googlegroups.com Fri May 13 06:01:37 2011 Received: from mail-yi0-f61.google.com ([209.85.218.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QKrzp-0004zC-DU; Fri, 13 May 2011 06:01:37 -0700 Received: by yie19 with SMTP id 19sf3079502yie.16 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 06:01:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:date:from:reply-to:to:message-id :in-reply-to:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:precedence :mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=wqk/BCbzdW8UhKYGyNE3vv8w46mr7MzXIL+CB0jUX1M=; b=X8o2Tqi9fvHCRqni9TqaB7Hd8nZUcpjKfBshpEuLkjAbddw3N6qWGo6EAc2KaF7mec Zu38q3zdk59wDT7TAh6XLzY3oirjsYCwQiHMyJuQCxxQyQmM1C0cnoaYPhZphIS+NwC2 0LVxMsei9xt1PUAPy0N7k06TOAFUD1Dp0F1eg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:date:from:reply-to:to:message-id:in-reply-to:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=C3uGPVE/yd8gys7PhEJLIW5If6QfEfnpEoQuN1zeQCiCSpV6ckXpGyOwTMUJhW/T1N 4kLG+arP0UKDQ/X93fDiK7n86zLTwvNKYigcSAuCY6srKfEtO08AL7iMCk2YJh3js3+l zxvrEmX9ac+5XU0PBk3oFEFdC0TKdeDr2IxiI= Received: by 10.91.37.12 with SMTP id p12mr173271agj.22.1305291683606; Fri, 13 May 2011 06:01:23 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.91.32.9 with SMTP id k9ls280534agj.2.gmail; Fri, 13 May 2011 06:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.91.160.32 with SMTP id m32mr165808ago.14.1305291682497; Fri, 13 May 2011 06:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 06:01:21 -0700 (PDT) From: djandus Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-ID: <14162377.1164.1305291681769.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqaf40> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [lojban] Lojban Thinking MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: jandew@gmail.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="----=_Part_1163_6798774.1305291681767" ------=_Part_1163_6798774.1305291681767 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Friday, May 13, 2011 7:16:22 AM UTC-5, xorxes wrote: > > On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 5:11 AM, djandus wrote: > > I meant there wouldn't be as close of synonyms as in English. As far as I > > know, there aren't Lojban words with as close of meaning as "pretty" vs. > > "beautiful" or "hard" vs. "difficult". > > "nandu" vs "tolfrili" > > > Also, I shifted in my mind, but did not write it, from thinking about > > dictionaries to thinking about speech in Lojbanistan. Thus, my example > {ko'a > > melbi mi} was a good one, where I had in mind two people who know each > > other, and the definer points to something specifically pretty and makes > his > > statement. > > Assumung the pretty thing is in front of the speaker, how would you > tell whether the definer was defining "melbi" or "crane"? > By another example, as I'd imagine learning new words as a beginner would always run for any language :) > But in general, yes, that's how people learn how to use most words in > any language, by imitating others. > > > Anyway, if you could give me an example where a Lojban word is best > defined > > with the aid of a synonym, that'd be extremely helpful to me. > > There are many "tol"-pairs: lenku-tolglare, xlali-tolxamgu, cmalu-tolbarda, > ... > > Also there are "sel"- or "ter"-pairs: rirni-selpanzi, cpacu-tersabji, ... > > Even if they are not always exact synonyms one can often help in > defining the other. > > Then there's things like "jivbu" and "nivji" which seem almost synonymous > to me. > Ah, but they are very different (to different people :P ) (I don't actually know the difference, only that people who know it are very particular about it...) > mu'o mi'e xorxes > As for everything else, let me clarify a bit. As far as I know, (once again) all of these lujvo examples are ones created on-the-fly, not explicitly defined. For that, they are extremely similar to their basic tanru counterparts in this case, at least in that forming the word did not take recalling a basic familiar word so much as forming a new description from distinct words. Basically, what I'm saying is if someone asks for the meaning of {lenku}, and you give {tolglare}, it's a description, the polar opposite. Thanks to Lojban's system of lujvo and tanru, when someone asks for one lujvo's meaning, there's probably a good way of describing it, purely with a selbri. When either person is interpreting this new combination, it's being interpreted by each individual part's meaning -- still completely different from giving "hard" as a synonym for "difficult". This is what I mean: Lojban makes describing things so simple and straightforward that we start doing it without even realize we're going through that effort. It's so simple to give {tolglare}, so obvious, but there is no other basic gismu that means the same thing as {lenku}. If there were, that would be a failure on Lojban's part. And I'm comparing this to things like "hard" vs. "difficult", to which I place no difference in meaning when I use them. In fact, the only reason I use "difficult" is because "hard" has two meanings, and I try to avoid that confusion. We even have defined the Lojban word for "difficult" with the gloss word "hard". They're two basic English words with the same usefulness in one respect, and when you use one in one sentence, you're culturally pressured to use another in the next, to avoid repetitiveness. But do we ever pressure Lojbanists to use {tolglare} if they used {lenku} recently? This is the fundamental difference I'm trying to point out -- the natlangs I have used expect extremely similar synonyms for the vast majority of words. Not different in part of speech or anything, at most slightly nuanced in connotation and at worst merely colloquial. And then they expect the speaker to have them all on hand to swap freely between them arbitrarily. Lojban instead simply says "Here's a set of unique basic words, and the rules for pulling the nuances out of their meanings. Have a field day." And it just works. As for fu'ivla, that doesn't count -- if you're borrowing a word from another language, then of course there's a synonym. tl;dr My restriction was on gismu and Lojban culture, not borrowed words and descriptions. My claim is that Lojban, lacking basic gismu synonyms for simplicity, makes it feel more natural to try to define words with useful descriptions or examples rather than first searching for a basic synonym. I don't say that Lojban makes the descriptive or example process easier, it just cuts out that middle bit where you realize you already know a basic word for that. -djandus -- 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. ------=_Part_1163_6798774.1305291681767 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Friday, May 13, 2011 7:16:22 AM UTC-5, xorxes wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 5:11 AM, djandus &= lt;jan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I meant there wouldn't be as = close of synonyms as in English. As far as I
> know, there aren't Loj= ban words with as close of meaning as "pretty" vs.
> "beautiful" or "= hard" vs. "difficult".

"nandu" vs "tolfrili"

> Also, I shifted i= n my mind, but did not write it, from thinking about
> dictionaries t= o thinking about speech in Lojbanistan. Thus, my example {ko'a
> melb= i mi} was a good one, where I had in mind two people who know each
> = other, and the definer points to something specifically pretty and makes hi= s
> statement.

Assumung the pretty thing is in front of the spe= aker, how would you
tell whether the definer was defining "melbi" or "cr= ane"?

By another example, as I'd imagine learning new = words as a beginner would always run for any language :) 

But in general, yes, that's how pe= ople learn how to use most words in
any language, by imitating others.

> Anyway, if you could give me an example where a Lojban word is be= st defined
> with the aid of a synonym, that'd be extremely helpful t= o me.

There are many "tol"-pairs: lenku-tolglare, xlali-tolxamgu, cma= lu-tolbarda, ...

Also there are "sel"- or "ter"-pairs: rirni-selpanzi= , cpacu-tersabji, ...

Even if they are not always exact synonyms one = can often help in
defining the other.

Then there's things like "ji= vbu" and "nivji" which seem almost synonymous to me.

A= h, but they are very different (to different people :P )
(I don't= actually know the difference, only that people who know it are very partic= ular about it...) 
<= p>mu'o mi'e xorxes


As for everythin= g else, let me clarify a bit.

As far as I know, (o= nce again) all of these lujvo examples are ones created on-the-fly, not exp= licitly defined. For that, they are extremely similar to their basic tanru = counterparts in this case, at least in that forming the word did not take r= ecalling a basic familiar word so much as forming a new description from di= stinct words.
Basically, what I'm saying is if someone asks for t= he meaning of {lenku}, and you give {tolglare}, it's a description, the pol= ar opposite. Thanks to Lojban's system of lujvo and tanru, when someone ask= s for one lujvo's meaning, there's probably a good way of describing it, pu= rely with a selbri. When either person is interpreting this new combination= , it's being interpreted by each individual part's meaning -- still complet= ely different from giving "hard" as a synonym for "difficult". This is what= I mean: Lojban makes describing things so simple and straightforward that = we start doing it without even realize we're going through that effort. It'= s so simple to give {tolglare}, so obvious, but there is no other basic gis= mu that means the same thing as {lenku}. If there were, that would be a fai= lure on Lojban's part. And I'm comparing this to things like "hard" vs. "di= fficult", to which I place no difference in meaning when I use them. In fac= t, the only reason I use "difficult" is because "hard" has two meanings, an= d I try to avoid that confusion. We even have defined the Lojban word for "= difficult" with the gloss word "hard". They're two basic English words with= the same usefulness in one respect, and when you use one in one sentence, = you're culturally pressured to use another in the next, to avoid repetitive= ness. But do we ever pressure Lojbanists to use {tolglare} if they used {le= nku} recently? This is the fundamental difference I'm trying to point out -= - the natlangs I have used expect extremely similar synonyms for the vast m= ajority of words. Not different in part of speech or anything, at most slig= htly nuanced in connotation and at worst merely colloquial. And then they e= xpect the speaker to have them all on hand to swap freely between them arbi= trarily. Lojban instead simply says "Here's a set of unique basic words, an= d the rules for pulling the nuances out of their meanings. Have a field day= ." And it just works.
As for fu'ivla, that doesn't count -- if yo= u're borrowing a word from another language, then of course there's a synon= ym.

tl;dr
My restriction was on gismu an= d Lojban culture, not borrowed words and descriptions.
My claim i= s that Lojban, lacking basic gismu synonyms for simplicity, makes it feel m= ore natural to try to define words with useful descriptions or examples rat= her than first searching for a basic synonym.
I don't say that Lo= jban makes the descriptive or example process easier, it just cuts out that= middle bit where you realize you already know a basic word for that.
=

-djandus

--
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.
------=_Part_1163_6798774.1305291681767--