On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 19:36, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
I'd dispense with them unless it's easier to make a type-4 with them. For
instance, from "isiXhosa" I made "sitlosa" (there is nothing resembling a
click in Lojban, so I picked something vaguely similar to the sound). But
for "Nyankore" I'd say "niankore". Similarly, Uw Olkola (an Australian
language closely related to Uw Oykangand) I call "olkola", and Guugu
Yimidhirr could be "iimdiri" (or "bangrjimidiri" for type-3).Are these documented anywhere? The problem with doing this on an ad-hoc basis, as was suggested before, is that without them at least listed somewhere, I'd have no idea whatsoever how to look up "Uw Oykangand" in Lojban, or even if someone had yet coined a term for it. If people seriously want Lojban to take on an international aspect (as I would like to see, especially in the realm of international scholarship) I fail to see how doing this "ad hoc" accomplishes anything except a complete muck of different people using different words.
(And, yes, I know this is not at issue right now, while the community is small, but someday, hopefully, there will be a bunch of people using Lojban whom you have never met. Unless the goal of free use is to have Lojban fracture into a whole slew of different dialects, I just don't see how having this continue ad hoc is productive. (It's also kind of weird, because it ends up being first-come, first-served, but that's another issue, I suppose.))--
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.