On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
Then instead of answering the questions by giving /_*examples*_/ like was asked, you give another analysis, and what I would call a Philosopher's Response to the third question.. Which, by the way, basically kills the likelihood of the /audience/ /participating/, which, seeing as it's in the acronym, is, you know, kind of the point. (Another point being that it's for Beginner's. The reason it's on the Beginner's list.)I mean, you did a whole huge Logician's analysis on the birdi apparently before even /bothering/ with the rest of the message..u'inai.o'o.i'enaicu'i.ienaicu'i.o'u.oisairo'eYour whole missive is completely not in the spirit of the APE.
And then you say you the format of this APE, which by the way is the same the original set, is better, because chatters use IRC. APEs are not and never were about "chatting". Obviously a chat room (IRC) is for chatting, while a forum thread (Lojban, Lojban for Beginner's , etc.) is for long-term discussion. I was asking about the category. The originals were things like "Write a Lojban haiku, Write some Lojban proverbs, Write a Lojban greeting that doesn't involve coi/co'o, i.e. translations of things like "Good Morning!".
P.S. I don't care if the terms I used to describe sections of your missive are accurate, and I know they aren't technical. That's what (most) everything you write looks like to me, and my opinion is my opinion. Sometimes I agree with you, sometimes I don't, but that's neither here nor there right now, and if you would like to debate with me my response, I am willing in a new topic on main.
I was not trying to be dismissive. I like the question. I think it is very well motivated, and that answering it is very illuminating for any that don't already know the answer. Nevertheless I think such an answer exists, which makes it a "closed" question, perhaps more fitting for an interactive lesson than a fully open-ended activity.
My reasoning is as follows. The difference between your first bridi and the {na} version of your second bridi is quite clean, I think, and in fact it is a nice example of the precision you can get with negation in Lojban. In English, while "he didn't tell the truth" doesn't necessarily imply that he told something that wasn't the truth, it so strongly suggests it that if you didn't mean that, you would probably need to specify this explicitly. I think Lojban, if not in the language then in its culture, tries to avoid such inherent biases to a significant extent, getting sharp distinctions like the one I described as a result.
Sorry for screwing this up a bit.
mi'e la latro'a mu'o--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.