Message-ID: <3299.85.226.150.111.1131084046.squirrel@handgranat.org>
In-Reply-To: <20051103174746.GQ24389@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
References: <26506d300511030415j48a05aefm@mail.gmail.com>
    <20051103174746.GQ24389@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 07:00:46 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: How 'natural' a language?
From: sunnan@handgranat.org
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Importance: Normal
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Length: 807

> .i ko malgletu lo xasli doi toldrani tolmencre

Interesting. Tell me more about these fascinating practices.
Is pe'a optional? Maybe I overuse pe'a, I don't know. I usually think I
don't use it enough.

When I first told my friends about lojban, several asked about the swear
words.

Them: "The swear words, are they sexual in nature?"
Me: "No. They're not related to the human body nor to any jegvo[*] concept."
Them: "Hurray!"

That's part of the good things[**] that I've felt sapir-whorf and careful
lojban use has brought - less connecting sexuality and the human body with
anger and shame.

mi'e snan
* We didn't speak in English and I don't remember the exact dialog. I
certainly didn't use the word "jegvo". But this was the gist of it.
** The bad part has been an annoying literal-mindedness.