Lojban In General

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 06:11, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a similar gripe about "di'u" and "la'e di'u". Why is the most
> common and useful "la'e di'u" a compound, and the less useful "di'u" a
> single word? Normally we are much more likely to want to talk about
> la'e di'u than about di'u.

You have to admit, it's a lot cleaner conceptually. What would be the
alternative? Keep di'u, and la'e, and add another cmavo (or several)
for la'e di'u simply because of the frequency of usage? Given that the
ambiguity of la'e could stand to be fixed, would we rather add
variations on la'e, or single-cmavo variations on la'e di'u?

Chris Capel
--
"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> You have to admit, it's a lot cleaner conceptually. What would be the
> alternative? Keep di'u, and la'e, and add another cmavo (or several)
> for la'e di'u simply because of the frequency of usage?

That would be one possibility. "tei" and "tau" are what I would have
liked for "la'e di'u" and "la'e de'u", or something like that. But I
wouldn't mind not having "di'u" (and all its cousins) there in the
first place. "lu'e tei", "lu'e tau" would have been the compounds to
be used in the more rare cases when we do want to refer to the
expressions themselves.

>Given that the
> ambiguity of la'e could stand to be fixed, would we rather add
> variations on la'e, or single-cmavo variations on la'e di'u?

What ambiguity do you have in mind?

mu'o mi'e xorxes

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 06:11, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have a similar gripe about "di'u" and "la'e di'u". Why is the most
>> common and useful "la'e di'u" a compound, and the less useful "di'u" a
>> single word? Normally we are much more likely to want to talk about
>> la'e di'u than about di'u.
>
> You have to admit, it's a lot cleaner conceptually. What would be the
> alternative? Keep di'u, and la'e, and add another cmavo (or several)
> for la'e di'u simply because of the frequency of usage? Given that the
> ambiguity of la'e could stand to be fixed, would we rather add
> variations on la'e, or single-cmavo variations on la'e di'u?

We could simply have {di'u} mean what {la'e di'u} means now and
use {lu'e di'u} to mean what {di'u} means now.

--
Daniel Brockman
daniel@brockman.se

> "tei" and "tau" are what I would have
> liked for "la'e di'u" and "la'e de'u", or something like that.

Interesting. Those are some wasted quality short cmavo.

I keep thinking we should deprecate all those short cmavo that
nobody uses as soon as possible, so we can start using them
for something else eventually.

> But I
> wouldn't mind not having "di'u" (and all its cousins) there in the
> first place.

Agreed. Those are the only members of KOhA I neither remember
nor use, except for {di'u} and {di'e}.

> "lu'e tei", "lu'e tau" would have been the compounds to
> be used in the more rare cases when we do want to refer to the
> expressions themselves.

Very wise, Zipf-wise.

--
Daniel Brockman
daniel@brockman.se

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 03:08:59PM +0100, Daniel Brockman wrote:
> > "tei" and "tau" are what I would have
> > liked for "la'e di'u" and "la'e de'u", or something like that.
>
> Interesting. Those are some wasted quality short cmavo.
>
> I keep thinking we should deprecate all those short cmavo that
> nobody uses as soon as possible, so we can start using them
> for something else eventually.

I was going to refer you to http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Cmavo+that+are+a+ghastly+waste+of+precious+monosyllabic+cmavo+space, but now I see that you've left your mark there already.

Anyway, reassignment of extant cmavo is not likely to happen, for reasons of forwards-compatibility.

--
Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/
Never put off till tomorrow what you can do the day after tomorrow.

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

> Anyway, reassignment of extant cmavo is not likely to happen, for reasons of forwards-compatibility.

If nobody uses a cmavo and we deprecate it, is it still "extant"?

--
Daniel Brockman
daniel@brockman.se

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 08:57, Daniel Brockman <daniel@brockman.se> wrote:
>> Anyway, reassignment of extant cmavo is not likely to happen, for reasons of forwards-compatibility.
>
> If nobody uses a cmavo and we deprecate it, is it still "extant"?

"forwards compatibility" being "I want to read this lojban text from
20 years ago and they're using this cmavo in a very strange way that I
don't know...

Chris Capel
--
"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 07:54, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:

>>Given that the
>> ambiguity of la'e could stand to be fixed, would we rather add
>> variations on la'e, or single-cmavo variations on la'e di'u?
>
> What ambiguity do you have in mind?

I was referring to the wiki page on the topic that I can't now find.
But I believe you know which one. Is it now gone? Anyway, the central
point is that the "dereferencing" concept comes in many flavors, and
the distinction between flavors is sometimes important, and la'e
doesn't give you any power to distinguish.

Chris Capel
--
"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 1:36 AM, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 08:57, Daniel Brockman <daniel@brockman.se> wrote:
> >> Anyway, reassignment of extant cmavo is not likely to happen, for
> reasons of forwards-compatibility.
> >
> > If nobody uses a cmavo and we deprecate it, is it still "extant"?
>
> "forwards compatibility" being "I want to read this lojban text from
> 20 years ago and they're using this cmavo in a very strange way that I
> don't know...
>

Except we're not!

--
Daniel Brockman
daniel@brockman.se

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 08:57, Daniel Brockman <daniel@brockman.se> wrote:
>> Anyway, reassignment of extant cmavo is not likely to happen, for reasons of forwards-compatibility.
>
> If nobody uses a cmavo and we deprecate it, is it still "extant"?

The key here, I think, is not whether we're using it now, but whether
it has even been used. If not, then I think we could consider
deprecating it. Of course, the cutoff for how much use counts will be
contentious.

Chris Capel
--
"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 10:54, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 08:57, Daniel Brockman <daniel@brockman.se> wrote:
>>> Anyway, reassignment of extant cmavo is not likely to happen, for reasons of forwards-compatibility.
>>
>> If nobody uses a cmavo and we deprecate it, is it still "extant"?
>
> The key here, I think, is not whether we're using it now, but whether
> it has even

ever

> been used.

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

I sent this reply yesterday, but apparently it didn't get through.

de'i li 07 pi'e 11 pi'e 2008 la'o fy. Daniel Brockman .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
> If nobody uses a cmavo and we deprecate it, is it still "extant"?
.skamyxatra

I'd be willing to use them just to spite you. Let me try.

• ahem*

la latek. se za'e lersni me'o tau ly. .abu tau ty. .ebu tau xy.
.i me'o zai .tenguar. bu py. lerfu fi lo cukta
.i me'o tei lau krixa bu lau preti bu foi nalcatni terpandi

mu'omi'e la'o gy. Minimiscience .gy.

--
mi pu klama .i mi pu viska .i mi pu fanva fi la lojban.

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Minimiscience <minimiscience@gmail.com>wrote:

> I sent this reply yesterday, but apparently it didn't get through.
>
> de'i li 07 pi'e 11 pi'e 2008 la'o fy. Daniel Brockman .fy. cusku zoi
> skamyxatra.
> > If nobody uses a cmavo and we deprecate it, is it still "extant"?
> .skamyxatra
>
> I'd be willing to use them just to spite you. Let me try.
>

.u'icai doi .minimisaiens. do gasnu lenu mi mutce cmila ki'u di'u

>
> *ahem*
>
> la latek. se za'e lersni me'o tau ly. .abu tau ty. .ebu tau xy.
> .i me'o zai .tenguar. bu py. lerfu fi lo cukta
> .i me'o tei lau krixa bu lau preti bu foi nalcatni terpandi
>
> mu'omi'e la'o gy. Minimiscience .gy.
>
> --
> mi pu klama .i mi pu viska .i mi pu fanva fi la lojban.
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
> with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
> you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.
>
>

--
mu'o mi'e .topy'at.

.i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu

On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Minimiscience <minimiscience@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I'd be willing to use them just to spite you. Let me try.
>
> *ahem*
>
> la latek. se za'e lersni me'o tau ly. .abu tau ty. .ebu tau xy.

Unless you subscribe to Dot Side philosophy, this doesn't work the
way you intended (may I suggest la leiteks?)
--gejyspa

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

de'i li 11 pi'e 11 pi'e 2008 la'o fy. Michael Turniansky .fy. cusku zoi
skamyxatra.
> On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Minimiscience <minimiscience@gmail.com> wrote:
> > la latek. se za'e lersni me'o tau ly. .abu tau ty. .ebu tau xy.
>
> Unless you subscribe to Dot Side philosophy, this doesn't work the
> way you intended (may I suggest la leiteks?)
.skamyxatra

True. I often forget about that rule for {cmene}. "{la leitek.}" would be
better; the 'X' is supposed to make the sound of a Greek chi, so there's no 'S'
sound at the end.

mu'omi'e la'o gy. Minimiscience .gy.

--
mi pu klama .i mi pu viska .i mi pu fanva fi la lojban.

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:43 PM, Minimiscience <minimiscience@gmail.com> wrote:
> "{la leitek.}" would be
> better; the 'X' is supposed to make the sound of a Greek chi, so there's no 'S'
> sound at the end.

But isn't the sound of Greek chi more like Lojban's "x"? Or is it
suposed to be like Greek chi as pronounced in English?

mu o mi'e xorxes

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:43 PM, Minimiscience <minimiscience@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "{la leitek.}" would be
>> better; the 'X' is supposed to make the sound of a Greek chi, so there's no 'S'
>> sound at the end.

Ah, I see looking it up in wikipedia that you are right. I never knew
that. But than xorxes, below, is correct (actually, wikipedia shows
both leitek and leitex)

>
> But isn't the sound of Greek chi more like Lojban's "x"? Or is it
> suposed to be like Greek chi as pronounced in English?
--gejyspa