Re: [lojban] Jbofi'e working

On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Leo Molas <leos.molas@gmail.com> wrote:

2010/9/24 Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com>:

> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Krzysztof Sobolewski <jezuch@interia.pl>
> wrote:
>>
>> Dnia piątek, 24 września 2010 o 18:13:27 Jonathan Jones napisał(a):
>>
>> > lu ma lojbo valsi zoi py.rodak.py li'u drani
>>
>> ki'anai ki'e
>>
>> > .i.ua mi facki
>> >
>> > Polish
>> > (culture) po'olska
>>
>> From the very beginning I was looking for Polish stuff among lojban words
>> and now I'm sad to find that there's not even a gismu for it! What's more,
>> "polska" is a lujvo that means "colors of Polynesia" ;)

Yeap... we discussed about it some time ago, and there were many
discussions before that. I'm on the "boo to cultural gismu" side, even
when my country (Argentina) has its own gismu (gento).

The ISO codes idea was to replace all the cultural gismu, and start
using fu'ivla instead, created automatically, and also trying to
convince other people to do the same. There were many other proposals,
like jonathan's, and the time will say which one lojbanists prefer
(that and if we do stop using those ugly gismu, that make sad polish
people and people from many other countries)

My part in all that was to create some python scripts that, given a
list of countries/languages/currencies with their iso codes, create
other list with new fu'ivla. (for example, here are all the countries
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Ai4mbIPr2PUwdENVckVaOTJLbVdGVE5SeGJ0MTBTbGc&hl=en
). All of this was based on an algorithm created by xorxes.

>>
>> > Polish
>> > (language) bangrpolska
>>
>> Yeah, but Polish is an inflected language and spelling it as "bangrpolski"
>> (note the ending, from "język polski") was a kind of a political statement
>> zo'osai On the other hand gugdrpolska is about right in that regard, unless
>> you think of "państwo polskie" (and if I was really, really mean, I would
>> say gugdrjetcpospolita)
>>
>> > (Above from jbovlaste)
>> > Polish
>> > (Polish language) banpu'olu
>> >
>> > (I believe this one is based on the ISO code.)
>>
>> Well, ISO code for Poland is pl or pol. The latter is a rafsi for polno,
>> as I demonstrated above...
>> --

Yeap, that one is based on the iso code. One of the benefits of this
fu'ivla is that their pronunciation is not weird, with lots of
concatenated consonants.

>> Ecce Jezuch
>> "10 Com&ments": "God: Im #1. No pix, plz. Uz my name nicely. Day7holy.
>> Take care of mum&dad. Dont kill, scrU round, steal | lie. Keep yr hands
>> (&eyz) off wot isnt yrs!'" - Dziesięć przykazań w SMS-lang
>
> Well, I have to say I am in agreement with your frustrations. Not long ago,
> someone brought up the fact that Lojban has cultural gismu, but not all
> cultures are represented, and that Lojban's cultural neutrality is
> endangered by this fact, and that the solution was all or nothing - either
> all cultures have a cultural gismu, or none.
>
> There was also a side point that the cultural gismu that /do/ exist are too
> generic, such as glico "x1 is English/pertains to English-speaking culture
> in aspect x2", which refers to Brits, U.S.Americans, Canadians, South
> Africans, Australians, and possibly more, or to go the other way 'round,
> ropno "x1 reflects European culture/nationality/geography/Indo-European
> languages in aspect x2", which refers to the culture and nationality and
> geography and language of a region. In response to this second point, and
> the fact that I felt "nothing" was both easier than "all" and actually
> possible (due to the fact that cultures by their very nature are constantly
> forming, changing, and dissolving), I created culturally neutral lujvo for
> the individual concepts of nationality, culture, etc.:
>
> Language : banra'a
> Culture : klura'a
> Community : cemra'a
> Religion : jdara'a
> Nationality : selgu'era'a
> Territory : tutra'a
>
> Someone else decided to go with "all" and made fu'ivla using ISO codes for
> all the countries, languages, etc., which is how banpu'olu came about, and
> considering the immense effort, time, and discussion spent in the ISO
> code-based fu'ivla making, I'm not surprised my words got lost in the
> shuffle.
>
> (By the way, I would appreciate jbopre following the links and approving the
> words, and I would even more appreciate them being used.)
>
> There's even a tiki-page about this whole fiasco: which actually pre-dates
> the group thread:
> http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Boo+to+cultural+gismu
>
> --
> mu'o mi'e .aionys.
>
> .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi luk. mi patfu do
> zo'o
> (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
>

> --

I'm really convinced that cultural gismu are a bad thing, and should
be replaced. But this has some problems:

1) Gismu list is not going to change, at least in a very long time.

2) I think there is no consensus in which solution is better for the
replacement.

We could use iso generated fu'ivla, cmevla, jonathan's lujvo... Time
will say which one is prefered by most lojbanists.

I don't want to bore you more with this old discussion, but if any is
interested in continuing it, I'll be happy to do it.

mu'o mi'e .leos.

The lujvo I created aren't intended as a solution to the problem of having cultural gismu - they are a intended as a solution for the problem of multiple concepts, such as nationality, culture, religion, language, etc. in a culturally neutral way. They don't solve the problem of needing names for the various aforementioned. As an example, to refer to the culture of Greece would be {lo klura'a be la.grik.}, and Poland would be {lo tutra'a be la.polskis.}, or to use the fu'ivla, {lo tutra'a be la po'olska}