On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Michael Everson
<michael.everson@gmail.com> wrote:
On 26 Aug 2012, at 18:53, And Rosta wrote:
> I'd never heard of Jonathan's supposed rule either. If the guillemets are going to cooccur with lu/li'u, then my taste as to where to put them would be the same as Michael's, for precisely the reason he gives.
Well, that's two of us who share that taste. :-)
It's not "my" rule, and I was wrong about it's existence anyway.
> My personal preference, tho, would be not to couple guillemets with lu/li'u but to use one or the other: if guillements are used, then treat them as logographs rather than punctuation. I realize that's contrary to the Western typographical tradition, but it seems more fitting to the spirit of Lojban, which aimed to have speakable punctuation.
My personal preference would be to not have foreign symbols at all. I have seen Lojban written without punctuation, and I have seen Lojban written with punctuation, and between the two, with is ugly as sin. I find such punctuation distracting and repugnant.
No, I wouldn't do that. Chinese has a question particle and also uses the question mark redundantly. "?" is not like "2". "2" is a logograph for "èr" or "two"; they are more or less interchangeable. But I don't believe that "?" is a logograph for "ma" any more than it is a logograph for Esperanto "ĉu".