On Monday, March 25, 2013 5:50:26 AM UTC+4, stevo wrote:On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 9:11 PM, Ian Johnson <blindb...@gmail.com> wrote:Indeed, this has been something that has nagged at the back of my mind since I started studying the language; there are fairly few words which are sufficiently similar to their source language counterparts to help a speaker of a source language learn the language more easily.This is why I say the vocabulary is equally dífficult for everybody. The memory hooks aren't numerous for any given language, and they're not consistent enough to make them useful to learn. Totally ad hoc words could hardly be more difficult to learn than what we have.This algorithm originated in the first SciAm paper by JCB. He claimed the existence of global etymology. sei mi morji Lojban doesnt have any goals to prove the existence of such thing. The only reason to apply the algorithm is mnemonics. Otherwise Lojban is completely apriori.Given that the number of speakers of Romance languages exceed the number of Chinese speakers I suggest {difro} or similar gismu once again.
--However, what I'd like more is not to add more gismu but instead to remove some of the existing. The adoption of {selsumji}="difference" will teach newbies "predicate reasoning". If a person can cope with rearranging sumti places and knows the basic vocabulary then 'ey is already a good speaker of Lojban.The stated purpose of the algorithm doesn't seem like it was really achieved, pe'i. Not that that's a bad thing, as it still provides a source of an a priori vocabulary.mi'e la latro'a mu'o