From seidensticker@msn.com Tue Feb 06 11:12:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Seidensticker@msn.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 19:12:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 7358 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 19:12:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 19:12:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bilbo.w-link.net) (206.98.114.20) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 20:13:10 -0000 Received: from bobsprimary (dhcp79-dsl-gte3.w-link.net [206.129.86.79]) by bilbo.w-link.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA11391; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:09:56 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <006201c09070$ba8b4480$4f5681ce@wlink.net> To: "Robin Lee Powell" Cc: References: <000c01c0904a$286d3840$4f5681ce@wlink.net> <20010206134313.J18781@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Subject: Re: [lojban] Punctuation Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:12:19 -0800 Organization: Microsoft Corporation MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005F_01C0902D.ABD0F4A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "seidensticker" ------=_NextPart_000_005F_01C0902D.ABD0F4A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I read somewhere about the historical progression of punctuation. As I und= erstand it, writing was initially a string of consonants, then vowels were = made explicit, then spaces were added between words, and so on. Quotation = marks were in there somewhere. Certainly, adopting some trait from English= just because English has it doesn't make any sense. But I would think tha= t adding non-letter punctuation helps that punctuation (and, hence, the str= ucture of the sentence) visually stand out. No? Obviously, this wouldn't = have any effect on reading lojban. Getting a little crazy, this thinking could be extended for other wrapper p= airs besides lu/li'u, such as le/ku or be/be'o. Yes, the text might look a= little LISP-like, but it still think that it would be an aid to the reader= . Ignoring practical consideratations for a moment (like: what punctuation= would you use or how could jbofi'e be made to understand these synonyms?),= wouldn't this make the text easier to visually parse? On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 06:36:12AM -0800, seidensticker wrote: > The tutorials use lu/li'u to mean quote/unquote. That makes sense > when speaking (you need to refer to them with some name), but when > writing, wouldn't you use "/" or the French =AB/=BB ? I'm guessing tha= t I > haven't seen that in my limited writing because the tutorials wanted > to emphasize the correct terms for "/". I certainly wouldn't. I _like_ being able to run my writing through jbofi'e as a final check-up. -Robin ------=_NextPart_000_005F_01C0902D.ABD0F4A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I read somewhere about the historical=20 progression of punctuation.  As I understand it, writing was init= ially=20 a string of consonants, then vowels were made explicit, then spaces were ad= ded=20 between words, and so on.  Quotation marks were in there somewhere.&nb= sp;=20 Certainly, adopting some trait from English just because English has it doe= sn't=20 make any sense.  But I would think that adding non-letter punctuation = helps=20 that punctuation (and, hence, the structure of the sentence) visually stand= =20 out.  No?  Obviously, this wouldn't have any effect on reading=20 lojban.
 
Getting a little crazy, this thinking c= ould be=20 extended for other wrapper pairs besides lu/li'u, such as le/ku or=20 be/be'o.  Yes, the text might look a little LISP-like, but it still th= ink=20 that it would be an aid to the reader.  Ignoring practical consideratations for a moment (= like:=20 what punctuation would you use or how could jbofi'e be made to understand t= hese=20 synonyms?), wouldn't this make the text easier to visually parse?
On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 06:36:12AM -0800, seidensticker wrote:
&g= t;=20 The tutorials use lu/li'u to mean quote/unquote.  That makes=20 sense
> when speaking (you need to refer to them with some name), b= ut=20 when
> writing, wouldn't you use "/" or the French =AB/=BB ?  = I'm=20 guessing that I
> haven't seen that in my limited writing because t= he=20 tutorials wanted
> to emphasize the correct terms for "/".

I= =20 certainly wouldn't.  I _like_ being able to run my writing=20 through
jbofi'e as a final=20 check-up.

-Robin
------=_NextPart_000_005F_01C0902D.ABD0F4A0--