Message-ID: <1180457789.465c5b3d89784@ssl0.ovh.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 18:56:29 +0200
From: m.kornig@sondal.net
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: My First Lojban Words 1.4
References: <1180380955.465b2f1b54bc7@ssl0.ovh.net> <2f91285f0705281848n491bc366u6d2423c7de6fc41@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2f91285f0705281848n491bc366u6d2423c7de6fc41@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.6
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Length: 2602

Selon Vid Sintef <picos.picos@gmail.com>:

> Learning words from dictionaries should actually be effective because that
> is what gives you mostly reliable definitions and exemplary usages.

If you have a good dictionary at hand, yes. But not for
beginners, I think.

> I said the word for "train" would be practical more for Spanish learners
> than Lojban learners because it is likely that the occasion to read/hear/say
> this term is more frequent in the Spanish language communty than in the
> Lojban community (there are more railroads in Mexico than in Lojbanistan).
> Yet of course we can leave { trene } on the list if we don't bother saving
> the number of items there.

There is also another mechanism:

Learners don't learn all words in a given textbook (or e-learning
tool) equally well. Consciously or unconsciously they "pick"
certain words of interest for them and learn them faster than
others.

There is not much you (as the author of a textbook) can do about it.
Of course you should avoid having too many words in your list
that are not of interest for the majority of your learners (because
they might all get bored and loose interest in your method). But
having a few words in your book that not everybody finds interesting
won't do much harm.

> > I'd distinguish between "general usefulness" and "personal usefulness".
> >
> > Of course. That's why I call it "MY first Lojban words".
>
>
> I'm confused, Martin. Are you saying that "My" in "My First Lojban Words"
> means "personal"?

Yes, by "my" I actually refer to myself.

It's my personal selection. The selection is not "objective" in
any way. In particular it's not the result of a public vote
or something. Even though some other people (like you, Vid) have
participated in the selecting words I won't dare to claim
objectiveness.

I wanted to make that clear right from the beginning. Hence
the title.

> I'd list "bird" rather than "mouse". Today I think I've seen more than 20
> birds and 0 mouse except the one under my right hand.

There will be both "bird" and "mouse" in the next version
of the list. Personally, I like "mouse", because this word
goes well together with "cat" and because there is the metaphor
PC mouse and there is Disney's Mickey Mouse?

By the way in some towns (like Hamburg, Germany) there are
more mice and rats than human inhabitants.

> If we think carefully, { bersa } (son) might be more useful than
> { nanla }.
> There might be more occasions in which somebody's son is mentioned/discussed
> than a boy is.

Again, in the next version you'll find both "nanla" and "bersa".

Martin