From pycyn@aol.com Sat Nov 24 07:27:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 24 Nov 2001 15:27:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 27438 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 15:27:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m10.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 24 Nov 2001 15:27:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r10.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.106) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Nov 2001 15:27:24 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id r.78.1e3ba921 (4554) for ; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:27:15 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <78.1e3ba921.29311653@aol.com> Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:27:15 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] presentation of lojban To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_78.1e3ba921.29311653_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_78.1e3ba921.29311653_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 11/24/2001 12:26:19 AM Central Standard Time,=20 ragnarok@pobox.com writes: > Did it have any novels written originally in Esperanto, or just translati= ons > (cf laopi pelxu ku'o trajynobli)? >=20 Yes. Does Lojban? =20 (cf ziryroi)?> Well, "significant" is tricky; there was quite a bit, both original and=20 translation and some of it even pretty good, as 19th century poetry goes. Not quite sure what this means, but in the the loosest sense, yes. http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?Lojban%20Rock%20Lyrics)?> If all you need is lyrics, certainly yes -- most hits were translated and=20 there were some original songs (not counting even the anthems) and even the= =20 odd oper(ett)a and choral church work. =20 any practical applications aside from as an interlanguage (Lojban has > several, and I hear that one has even been proposed)? > No, but unlike Lojban, it didn't plan any (and Lojban was, of course, not=20 planned for interlinguistics). Esperanto has had some linguistic uses sinc= e:=20 studies of the creolization of designed languages, the development of=20 dialects, and the like. linguistic thought put into it, or just a random guy making up root words > (And tinkit, you'd better not show up to harass us with any snide comment= s > about this zo'ocai)?> Well, there was the synthesis of the grammar (so-called, anyhow) and the=20 comaprative work involved in the not quite random establishment of the root= s=20 and the affixes.=20 > id anyone speak it outside of the (formerly > Volap=FCkist) language clubs (cf Logfest [with the jboste and the wiki as= the >=20 Yes. The clubs were the starting point but it quickly spread to quite=20 independent Esperanto clubs and to unafiliated people (the first person to= =20 confront Zamenhof speaking Esperanto was not a club member). This is not to praise Esperanto, which is only an SAE code and thus a snare= ,=20 but to point out that we are not nearly so wonderful as we sometimes like t= o=20 think we are. Times have changed, of course, and there are many more=20 competitors for our interest (and many fewer people with nothing to do but= =20 learn a new language and produce something in it), but we should not make t= oo=20 much of our achievements, which probably don't even compare all that well=20 with Klingon, to pick something somewhat more contemporary. --part1_78.1e3ba921.29311653_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 11/24/2001 12:26:19 AM Central Standard Time, ragnarok= @pobox.com writes:


Did it have any novels wr= itten originally in Esperanto, or just translations
(cf laopi pelxu ku'o trajynobli)?

Yes.  Does Lojban?

=20
<Did it have a significant body of poetry

(cf ziryroi)= ?>


Well, "significant" is tricky; there was quite a bit, both original and= translation and some of it even pretty good, as 19th century poetry goes.

<Did it have its own aphorisms?>
Not quite sure what this means, but in the the loosest sense, yes.

<Did it have its own music (cf

http://nuzba= n.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?Lojban%20Rock%20Lyrics)?>
If all you need is lyrics, certainly yes -- most hits were translated a= nd there were some original songs (not counting even the anthems) and even = the odd oper(ett)a and choral church work.
=20
<Did it have
any practica= l applications aside from as an interlanguage (Lojban has
several, and I hear that one has even been proposed)? >=


No, but unlike Lojban, it didn't plan any (and Lojban was, of course, n= ot planned for interlinguistics).  Esperanto has had some linguistic u= ses since: studies of the creolization of designed languages, the developme= nt of dialects, and the like.

<Did it have any
linguistic t= hought put into it, or just a random guy making up root words
(And tinkit, you'd better not show up to harass us with any snide comme= nts
about this zo'ocai)?>


Well, there was the synthesis of the grammar (so-called, anyhow) and th= e comaprative work involved in the not quite random establishment of the ro= ots and the affixes.=20


D
id anyone speak it outsi= de of the (formerly
Volap=FCkist) language clubs (cf Logfest [with the jboste and the wiki = as the
analogues of the clubs, IMHO])?


Yes.  The clubs were the starting point but it quickly spread to q= uite independent Esperanto clubs and to unafiliated people (the first perso= n to confront Zamenhof speaking Esperanto was not a club member).

This is not to praise Esperanto, which is only an SAE code and thus a s= nare, but to point out that we are not nearly so wonderful as we sometimes = like to think we are.  Times have changed, of course, and there are ma= ny more competitors for our interest (and many fewer people with nothing to= do but learn a new language and produce something in it), but we should no= t make too much of our achievements, which probably don't even compare all = that well with Klingon, to pick something somewhat more contemporary.
--part1_78.1e3ba921.29311653_boundary--