From opoudjis@optushome.com.au Sun Sep 22 18:16:16 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: opoudjis@optushome.com.au X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 23 Sep 2002 01:16:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 99091 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2002 01:16:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 23 Sep 2002 01:16:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.its.unimelb.EDU.AU) (128.250.20.112) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Sep 2002 01:16:15 -0000 Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by SMTP.UNIMELB.EDU.AU (PMDF V5.2-29 #46888) id <01KMU6RG0ZMO915JI6@SMTP.UNIMELB.EDU.AU> for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 11:16:13 +1000 Received: from [128.250.86.21] (porchermac.language.unimelb.edu.au [128.250.86.21]) by SMTP.UNIMELB.EDU.AU (PMDF V5.2-29 #46888) with ESMTP id <01KMU6RFOTJ096YDZ1@SMTP.UNIMELB.EDU.AU> for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 11:16:13 +1000 Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 11:15:19 +1000 Subject: Tengwar on frontespieces X-Sender: opoudjis@mail.optushome.com.au To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" From: Nick Nicholas X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=90350612 X-Yahoo-Profile: opoudjis I draw your attention to http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?Tengwar In particular to the suggestion that Tengwar might be nice to have on a frontespiece of the lessons. Also http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?Why%20Tengwar%3F , which has plenty of arguments for and against Tengwar. Note in particular: (con) Tengwar is Grand Geek Central, and We Don't Want Lojban Associated With It; (pro) Tengwar is just about as old as anything in Lojban, and is part of Lojban culture inasmuch as several people in the community use it off and on. So: Would anyone vehemently object to the Lessons cover art containing Tengwar alongside Roman script for Lojban? Would anyone objecting object less vehemently if the Tengwar is somehow disguised, stylised, or deemphasised? Same question for Level 0. My own opinion is: no Tengwar on Level 0, a publication more explicitly associated with the LLG and officialness; but yes, stylised and deemphasised Tengwar on the cover of the Lessons, which is a less official project. I'm particularly interested in my co-author's opinion on this. Robin? -- **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** * Dr Nick Nicholas, Linguistics/French & Italian nickn@unimelb.edu.au * University of Melbourne, Australia http://www.opoudjis.net * "Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity of locutional rendering, the * circumscriptional appelations are excised." --- W. Mann & S. Thompson, * _Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organisation_, 1987. * **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****