On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Robert LeChevalier <
lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>
> Nora would have to speak for herself, but her misgivings extend to the old
> loi/lei pair (and I won't pretend to know any more, because I have no idea
> what xorlo did to them).
Simplified them. Made them comprehensible. Made them immediately,
basically obvious. And if it wasn't xorlo that made Lojban's articles
so simple that they are immediately obvious, well then, SOMETHING did,
because now they are.
The only and entire distinction between lo and loi is that the latter
is a mass. Specifically, "loi broda" means exactly "lo gunma be lo
broda", a mass composed of broda. All usages of "loi" could in fact
be systematically rewritten as phrases using "lo" and "gunma". For
instance "loi remna cu bevri lo pipno", the (mass of) humans carry the
piano, is exactly equivalent to "lo gunma be lo remna cu bevri lo
pipno", a mass whose components are humans carries the piano.
The distinction between lo/loi and le/lei is a separate and equally
simple distinction. In this case in the deep structure the meaning is
accomplished by "skicu", describe. So "le broda" transforms to "zo'e
noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka ce'u broda", something which I describe it
to you as being broda.
The only extent therefore to which the meaning of "le" is still
uncertain is the extent to which we have not nailed down the meaning
of "skicu". Here is how I understand it: The x1 (skicu) is easy
enough, it's the person describing, and the x3 (terski) is the
audience. The x2 (selski) is the thing being described, which could
be anything at all, as anything can be described somehow. The x4
(velski) is the only possibly tricky one, the description. It's
listed as a quality, as opposed to say a sedu'u, which to me suggests
that you can also skicu something without using words. So to skicu
something, you somehow reveal or illustrate one or more of its
properties to someone.
As far as what flavor that gives to a sumti using "le", this is my
impression, based on how people have been using it: As a skicu, you
have a particular something in mind, the selski, that you're
describing to the terski. You're describing it to the terski by
showing them one particular quality, the velski, but that's probably
not the only quality of the selski that you know or have in mind.
Often the selski is a particular instance, something concrete, but
even if it's abstract it is usually a somewhat rich abstraction in
your (the skicu's) mind. For instance it would be more likely to be
something like "the sort of apple that I'd like to eat", where you
could describe it to a listener as having various qualities, such as
"being an apple" and "not being rotten" and "being delicious" and "not
belonging to anyone else so that I won't get in trouble for eating
it", etc., as opposed to just a truly generic abstract "apple" with no
other qualities.
It does not entirely matter though exactly what "skicu" means, if that
worries you, because there is no circumstance at all where you NEED to
implicitly assert that you skicu by saying "le". You can simply go
ahead and use "lo" all the time-- it's never ever wrong. And that is
indeed what every Lojban teacher that I know of tells their students
to do, and that is also what I recommend to you.
> One thing to remember is that Nora and I used pre-xorlo in Lojban for around
> 20 years, and Nora used the TLI Loglan articles for around a decade before
> that. Our usage was ingrained, habitual, fluent (at least with regard to
> choosing articles).
I feel safe in saying that I speak for almost everyone here when I say
that we would much rather hear Lojban with funny articles from you
than silence! We don't even pay any attention to what articles people
use anymore. :)
> Unlearning for us is non-trivial - I still on occasion use the gismu "gumri",
> even though it was eliminated more than 15 years ago.
So do I!
In fact I teach "gumri" to my students. I teach them the history of
the word, of course, and that they shouldn't usually use it, because
it "doesn't exist" even though we all actually know it! :D
Some other words that "don't exist" that I teach my students (because
they'll actually encounter them in Lojbanistan, going around not
existing) include laldo, kibro, zvero, nuzlo, lo'ai sa'ai le'ai,
la'oi...
> (All three LogFlash programs were produced, and still exist, but I think
> only Nora and I ever used the cmavo program to mastery, and only I used the
> rafsi/lujvo program, and not to the point of mastery.)
I first learned the gismu from LogFlash, but I only tried the other
versions a few times.
> I dunno if it exists or even is possible, but a constantly available and
> updating IRC log, where one would log in and see the last couple of pages of
> discussion, regardless of how-long-ago it took place, would help,
This is exactly how IRC works. It's a beautiful, harmoniously
balanced, elegant model. Unfortunately it is also deeply geeky, so
the elegance is not immediately apparent, hidden as it is behind an
entirely mysterious interface-- a geek's idea of elegance, after all,
almost never includes visible, clearly-labeled controls. :)
Unfortunately IRC is also such a geeky idea that to use it properly
requires you have a computer always running-- to some I suppose that
seems only as onerous a requirement as that you have electricity or
running water. :) Even while you're not there, your computer is
always "idling" in the IRC channel, receiving all of the messages for
you. At any time you can come to the computer and check the channel,
and the most recent messages will be ready for you, regardless of how
long ago they were. It's not expected that you'll read all of the
"backlog", as it's called, but it is expected that you'll skim it for
mentions of your own name, which your IRC client will helpfully
highlight for you. If people in the channel want to bring something
to your attention, they mention your name, perhaps just saying "hey,
read this conversation we just had, above". They can tell that your
computer is saving the messages for you, because they can see your
name in the list of users in the channel.
It's also fine to drop in on a channel for a while, chat, and then
leave again. People who happen to be there at the time can read your
messages and respond to them, but also other people might read them
later when they read their backlog, and you can mention particular
people's usernames to make sure they notice what you said.
Anyway IRC totally isn't for everything or everyone. Especially these
days, there's a lot of other options. For instance Twitter is another
chatty medium, and everything said there is immediately on the web, so
that's useful in some ways. I like to follow this search for
instance, which isn't hard to keep up with at all:
http://search.twitter.com/search?q=lojban It's cool because not only
do you see Lojbanists' tweets to #lojban, but also there's usually a
funny comment or two in there every day from some random stranger
finding out about Lojban and saying what they think of it! Here's the
latest:
"CorentinGallet: @CorentinGallet Korean is GREAT. And Lojban is
supposed to be HIGLY SUPERIOR. Doesn't matter. I'm speaking in Caml."
.u'i
mi'e la stela selckiku
mu'o
--
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.
--
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.