Women-specific 'artlang', invented by Suzette Haden Elgin. Lojban's evidentials are inherited from it (although of course, LÃ¡adan in turn got them from Amerindian human languages.)
What does it mean for a language to have a gender? - la kreig.daniyl.
Check out http://www.interlog.com/~kms/Laadan/, and you tell me!
Another "test of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis" language.
It has words for womanly things. That doesn't make it womanly, just gender-neutral. English may be "male" in some way, but laadan strikes me as neither.
LÃ¡adan is clearly feminine; see the pretty purple they used for the web page? It looks like a breast cancer site.
But is the vocabulary purple also? (The vocabulary is indeed worth examining; it has specific terms for things like "discord in the home", "anger, for good and not futile reasons", "pain or loss which comes as a relief by virtue of ending the anticipation of its coming", "contentment despite negative circumstances", "the female sexual act", and "the act of relinquishing a cherished/ comforting/ familiar perception".)
I despair of this ThreadMode discourse ever congealing into DocumentMode , but the foundational assumption of LÃ¡adan is that women's perception of the word is fundamentally incommensurable with men's. So if purple meta-means what I think it meta-means, the answer is yes.
Lojban got its evidentials from LÃ¡adan, but they are organized quite differently:
Most LÃ¡adan sentences contain three particles:
- The speech-act particle â€“ this occurs at the beginning of the sentence and marks it as either a statement (bÃi), a question (bÃ¡a), et cetera; in connected speech or writing, this particle is often omitted. They are:
|BÃi||Indicates a declarative sentence (usually optional)||ju'a|
|BÃ¡a||Indicates a question||xu|
|BÃ³||Indicates a command; very rare, except to small children||ko|
|BÃ³o||Indicates a request; this is the usual imperative/"command" form||.e'o|
|BÃ©||Indicates a promise||nu'e|
|BÃ©e||Indicates a warning||.e'unai|
- The grammatical tense particle.
This occurs second in the sentence and marks it as either
|ril||present tense||ca ku|
|eril||past tense||pu ku|
|aril||future tense||ba ku|
Without the tense particle, the sentence is assumed to have the same tense as the previous sentence.
- The evidence particle â€“ this occurs at the end of statements and indicates the trustworthiness of the statement. They are:
|LÃ¡adan Evidence Act Morpheme||translation||Lojban equivalent|
|wa||Known to speaker because perceived by speaker, externally or internally||za'a/se'o/ju'a|
|wi||Known to speaker because self-evident||li'a|
|we||Perceived by speaker in a dream||se'o|
|wÃ¡a||Assumed true by speaker because speaker trusts source||.iati'e|
|waÃ¡||Assumed false by speaker because speaker distrusts source; if evil intent by the source is also assumed, the form is "waÃ¡lh"||.ianaiti'e|
|wo||Imagined or invented by speaker, hypothetical||da'i/ru'a|
|wÃ³o||Used to indicate that the speaker states a total lack of knowledge as to the validity of the matter|
|waÃ¡lh||.ianaiti'e.iunaidai? (There must be a better word for malicious intent.)|
This brings up an interesting question: What is the correct evidential in Lojban (assuming normal experiences) for a sentence like "mi xagji"? za'a? se'o?
Plugin execution pending approval
This plugin was recently added or modified. Until an editor of the site validates the parameters, execution will not be possible.