From lojbab@lojban.org Thu Jun 21 17:51:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 22 Jun 2001 00:51:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 24841 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2001 00:51:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jun 2001 00:51:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-2.cais.net) (205.252.14.72) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jun 2001 00:51:23 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org (209-8-89-137.dynamic.cais.com [209.8.89.137]) by stmpy-2.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5M0pM553385 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 20:51:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010621203038.00e01400@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: vir1036/pop.cais.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 20:56:18 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] mi prami la lojban .iku'i... In-Reply-To: <96.15eb10e7.2863e2b2@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" At 07:52 PM 06/21/2001 -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote: >>There is exactly one aspect of the language that irredemably annoys me, >>no matter what anyone says (and I've seen the explanation). >> >>The fact that the words for the numbers are not in alphabetical order. > >Or any other (vowels aside except occasionally). Has anyone come up with a >decent mnemonic? The vowels ARE in an order, and indeed alphabetical for the digits 1-9 (I should have made 0 consistent, but I was still trying to keep some words the same as in TLI Loglan where I could argue that my choice had some international non-Loglan basis - remember that Lojban was started primarily as an effort to change JCB's attitude, and not with the expectation that we would actually need to finish it uniquely.) The rules were no two numbers with the same first consonant and no two with the same vowel and only a voiced/unvoiced distinction. Relearning and systemization of other sets was the other key design factor. "le" and its relatives were unchangeable, as were ti/ta/tu, vi/va/vu, zi/za/zu, and se/te/ve/xe (which I SHOULD have made differently-vowelled, but oh well), mi, and ca/pu/ba and nu/ka/ni and du (the latter two sets and singleton derived from the related gismu). We needed two triplets like da/de/di, and ri/ra/ru, a fivesome like fa/fe/fi/fo/fu, and two logical connective fivesomes like ga/ge/gi/go/gu and ja/je/ji/jo/ju (all of which had preferences based on changing minimally from TLI Loglan values). There were a few others that could have been changed but I was motivated to restrict their values, like me, and ma/mo, and ku to replace gu, ke to replace ge. Given even these constraints though (especially the triplets and fivesomes) and numbers were not that easy to make maximally separable. >pc, who cannot reliably count to 5 in Lojban -- and certainly not to 6 (which >I can do in Hindi, for God sake!) Really! I knew parecivomu before I knew 50 gismu. xazebisono took me only a little longer. >OK, so other series were more imporant than numbers (what series? why?) Addressed above. > but >even given that, why couldn't the nine consonants used have been used in >order? We couldn't have met the noisy environment constraint that led to differentiating the vowels systematically, the consonants as different as possible. Think about bacedifogujakelimonu, for example, collides with 8 of those that I had reserved. Maybe there was another solution, but there weren't that many. > Ah, well, if this is the worst problem we have with Lojban (it is, >isn't it?), Of course %^) lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org