Re: [lojban] Re: cusku - say or express?

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Lindar Greenwood
<lindarthebard@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Personally, I don't understand why xorxes keeps trying to define Lojban in terms of other languages.

What the expletive are you talking about?

> Who gives a *insert colourful phrase here* what English or Spanish uses?  Seriously... If the keyword is your biggest gripe, then just pick a new keyword or pick more than one keyword.

Exactly. Preferably the one that makes the most sense, not the one
that makes the least sense.

> What bothers me is that, like Sonja keeps doing, you're trying to arbitrarily assign and map English words to Lojban words that don't have a direct translation to English, and then slapping on the "GOOD ENOUGH" decal.

Who is doing that? Ideally, Lojban words should be defined in Lojban,
which is for example what I did when offering:

ko'a bacru ko'e = ko'a cusku ko'e zi'o lo voksa

> x1 (agent) expresses/says x2 (sedu'u/text/lu'e concept) for audience x3 via expressive medium x4.
>
> It seems that there's no one single word to describe this concept as it doesn't exist in English (the language for which we're trying to find a keyword).

Exactly right. All I'm saying is that "expresses" is a terrible
keyword for "cusku", because what you express are
ideas/emotions/feelings/concepts/etc., whereas you don't cusku any of
those things, you cusku words/texts/signs/etc.

> In Lojban, this word can be used to express (<--hah) that somebody is saying something,

Yes, as in:

     da ca'o cusku de
     "Someone is saying something."

> it can be used to say that somebody is expressing a concept which can be expressed in a sentence (sedu'u),

Yes, as in:

     da cusku lo se du'u carvi
     "Someone says that it's raining."

> or even 'the symbol for...' (lu'e) in the case of hand gestures or any other applicable situation.

Yes, as in:

    da cusku lo se du'u carvi kei fo lo sinxa bangu
    "Someone says that it's raining using sign language."

(You could use "lu'e lo du'u carvi" instead of "lo se du'u carvi",
it's basically the same thing.)

> This could even be used to describe expressive dance, body language or other nonverbal communication, and any number of other strange concepts.

Examples in Lojban please?


> tavla... well, not gonna get into it, but it doesn't really say anything about the method of communication, only that it's one-sided/agentive.

Exactly. That's what I've been saying, right?

> You completely forgot casnu, but that falls under the same domain. Doesn't really specify. "converse"

You could basically define "casnu" in Lojban as:

ko'a casnu ko'e = ko'a simxu lo ka ce'u tavla ce'u ko'e zi'o

> So, every single 'communication word' we have doesn't specify verbal speech in any way, and we have a word specifically for "expresses with language-mouth-noises".

Right.

> Therefore, you can't really use words from English as we don't have these concepts.

What about "say", "talk", "discuss"? None of those specify spoken
speech either. You can say something in writing or using sign
language, you can talk about things in writing or using sign language,
you can discuss stuff in writing (as we are doing now) or using sign
language. Why are people focusing so much on the medium of
communication? Most of these words don't care at all about the medium.

> Perhaps "expressing" is the  best for cusku, regardless of whether or not it makes sense in English

That's nonsense. How can an English word that makes no sense for the
concept in question be the best?

> (because we're not speaking English, so what does it matter if it makes sense in English?

Then "skropiuty" is much better than "express", since we are not
speaking English.

> [specifically targeting xorxes here]),

[xorxes ducks]

>because "expressing through interpretive dance", "expressing through sign-language", "expressing through anecdote", "Expressing, 'I think we need more beer.' through yelling like an idiot." makes just about as much sense as you could possibly get through literal translation, keeping the same gloss word for each example (rather than, 'interpretively danced...', 'signed...', etc.).

Why not "saying through interpretive dance", "saying through
sign-language", "saying through anecdote"? "Expressing" works so long
as you don't say what it is you are expressing. Once you say that, it
stops working, because you cusku the sinxa, but you express the se
sinxa. You don't cusku the se sinxa, and you don't express the sinxa.

> To illustrate my point, how do you gloss "lo blanu"? You can't, because there is NO English equivalent, at all, ever. Sure you can argue "a blue thing" or just say "a blue", but "a blue thing" is "lo blanu co'e" and "a blue" is incorrect English grammar. There will NEVER be a way to translate that accurately to English, so you have to COMPROMISE. This is also what you need to do with all of these talking/expressing words, because they don't perfectly map to English (and if they did, I wouldn't be learning Lojban, because the point is to not map perfectly to English or we'd just be speaking English... or maybe Cockney...).

I don't think anybody disagrees with that. That's no excuse for
picking a very poor keyword though, especially when a much better one
is immediately available.

> So, you're both wrong.
> xorxes: Stop trying to map everything to English words like Lojban works that way.

na'i. I can't stop trying to do something I never started in the first place.

> rlp: Make a better suggestion, then.

He's the one that suggested "express", and I complained, so you have
to tell me to make a better suggestion, not him. And I did: "say".
"Say" is the closest match for "cusku", as close as you can get.
"Express" is a very poor match.

> The both of you: Stop wasting time arguing about arguing. At least 10 of those e-mails were just you two arguing about the way you were arguing.

Where? I thought we were all the time arguing about whether or not
"express" is a good enough match for "cusku".

> Huggles and loves for you both. Now, If you can't come to an agreement, then I'm taking your toys away and you're both grounded for a week. We're not having a damn civil war over how to map things to English when you both know better.

And just when we were starting to have fun, you spoilsport.

> cusku - express
> tavla - tell
> casnu - converse
> bacru - phonate
>
> There. Four whole words that can't be confused.
> Do these work for the both of you?

Of course not. Have you read anything I've been writing? "Express" is
a terrible keyword for "cusku". You cusku words/text/signs, you
express ideas/emotions/feelings/concepts. You cusku lo sinxa, you
express lo se sinxa. See the difference?

"Tell" is bad for "tavla", much worse than "talk". "Tell" is "jungau".
You tell a proposition, you don't tavla/talk a proposition.

The other two are fine, though "converse" can easily be mistaken for
the adjective "converse", so I prefer "discuss", and "utter" or
"pronounce" sound better to me than "phonate", simply because
"phonate" is not a common word.

mu'o mi'e xorxes