Lojban In General

Lojban In General


The New Method

posts: 19

coi lo tadni .e lo ctuca mi'e .kribacr.

Greetings! As some of you may already know, myself as well as others have
been teaching lessons on IRC for the last couple months with some pretty
encouraging results, and I wanted to share some thoughts with the community
about the method and "path" I/we use in our lessons. There is a Google Wave
that is being compiled of our work, which I hope can be used as the
foundation not only for a new learning hard copy text (incorporating xorlo
and dotside) but as the basis for an online interactive lesson, the details
of which I'd like to outline here and open for questions and comments.

The biggest change in teaching methods and the one thing that I've noticed
having the best impact is the up-front teaching of terminators; their use,
and why they are important and necessary. Only after establishing this basis
do we teach {cu} and elision, and this method has produced stronger
understanding in when they are needed and why they are useful. I am also
putting a stronger emphasis on teaching only the necessary terminology when
absolutely needed. We basically go through as much as we can using only the
terms {selbri}, {bridi}, and {sumti}. This has allowed more ground to be
covered earlier, which then provides more of a basis and contrast for the
student to then better grasp the more complex forms and terminology that
comes later.

Without further ado, this is a rough outline to our new methods, in the
order in which they are taught:

- General introduction - a bit on "thinking lojbanically", the terms
sumti, selbri, and bridi, a few sample bridi using only simple KOhA like
{mi} {do} and {ti}, and trying to convey the differences between English and
lojban and why selbri, sumti, and bridi don't really exist in English.
- A more detailed look at place structure, and how to play with it - the
rules for sliding sumti around, and also introduce FA.
- Simple tanru, using as diverse of a vocabulary as we can muster. We
teach with great emphasis that ANY time two selbri are adjacent in text,
they form a tanru. This emphasis and the fact that no terminators have been
introduced as of yet turns out to be a great aid in getting tanru formation
and proper sumti termination / {cu} usage correct.
- {lo ... ku} and possibly {la} (brivla version only) - No specific
mention that {ku} may be left out is made. Stress the openness of xorlo {lo}
and its specific use, and give examples that are contrary to English thought
- {lo cnino ku}, {lo xunre ku}, etc.
- At this point, a brief on {ko}, {ma}, {mo}, and maybe a brief mention
of attitudinals and vocatives. (It's hard to put these off since they are so
frequently used, but I'd make the case that they can wait a bit.)
- {be ... bei ... be'o} - Again, making the case that the terminator is
necessary. Strong examples help here. Usually the idea of nesting these
within a tanru is easily taught and understood. Make a connection with the
earlier lesson about place structure in that the "first" sumti after a
selbri is going to be the x2.
- SE. State that you are essentially creating a new selbri with a new
place structure - this is a good time to potentially introduce the terms
{gismu} and {brivla}.
- {NU ... kei}. I only really mention {du'u} and {nu} since they are the
simplest and by far the most common. {su'u} is potentially worth a mention.
As always, strong detailed examples help.
- {cu} and terminator elision. By this time, the user is going to start
seeing very bulky phrases with 3, 4, 5 or more terminators at the end of
their jufra. What a mess! {cu} becomes a lot easier to teach in terms of the
"levels" it can cut through by teaching it right after NU.
- {fi'o ... fe'u} and BAI. Since this lesson comes after terminator
elision, {fe'u} should be mentioned but shown that it can be elided.Teaching
{fi'o} first opens up a lot of options and gets the students more
comfortable with tags in general.

Clearly there is still a lot to teach at this point: tenses, aspects,
connectives, fu'ivla, lujvo, etc. But I think the outline above covers a
strong majority of the structural aspects of lojban and have had great
success and reasonable retention when teaching students using this method.

As for the web-based lessons, I had the idea of writing out lessons in this
form (teaching more or less the full grammar in its basics) with one pass
and branding it "Level 1". "Level 2" will then be available to the user as a
direct overlay on the existing material. That is to say, that by checking a
box on the website or something, they can cause new text to mix in with the
existing lessons (probably of a different color). So the introduction
chapter will have the same Level 1 text, but will also expand upon those
ideas and possibly introduce more terminology for level 2. The {lo} / {la}
chapter can expand to detail {le} and the other use of {la} as well as inner
/ outer quantifiers in level 2. The NU chapter can explain some of the finer
points of NU and some of the other ones, {ni}, {ka}, {se du'u} vs. {du'u},
etc. Level 3 will just be another overlay with the absolute full detail of
the language.

I await your comments and suggestions.

posts: 92

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com>wrote:

> coi lo tadni .e lo ctuca mi'e .kribacr.
>
> Greetings! As some of you may already know, myself as well as others have
> been teaching lessons on IRC for the last couple months with some pretty
> encouraging results, and I wanted to share some thoughts with the community
> about the method and "path" I/we use in our lessons. There is a Google Wave
> that is being compiled of our work, which I hope can be used as the
> foundation not only for a new learning hard copy text (incorporating xorlo
> and dotside) but as the basis for an online interactive lesson, the details
> of which I'd like to outline here and open for questions and comments.
>
> The biggest change in teaching methods and the one thing that I've noticed
> having the best impact is the up-front teaching of terminators; their use,
> and why they are important and necessary. Only after establishing this basis
> do we teach {cu} and elision, and this method has produced stronger
> understanding in when they are needed and why they are useful. I am also
> putting a stronger emphasis on teaching only the necessary terminology when
> absolutely needed. We basically go through as much as we can using only the
> terms {selbri}, {bridi}, and {sumti}. This has allowed more ground to be
> covered earlier, which then provides more of a basis and contrast for the
> student to then better grasp the more complex forms and terminology that
> comes later.
>
> Without further ado, this is a rough outline to our new methods, in the
> order in which they are taught:
>
> - General introduction - a bit on "thinking lojbanically", the terms
> sumti, selbri, and bridi, a few sample bridi using only simple KOhA like
> {mi} {do} and {ti}, and trying to convey the differences between English and
> lojban and why selbri, sumti, and bridi don't really exist in English.
> - A more detailed look at place structure, and how to play with it -
> the rules for sliding sumti around, and also introduce FA.
> - Simple tanru, using as diverse of a vocabulary as we can muster. We
> teach with great emphasis that ANY time two selbri are adjacent in text,
> they form a tanru. This emphasis and the fact that no terminators have been
> introduced as of yet turns out to be a great aid in getting tanru formation
> and proper sumti termination / {cu} usage correct.
> - {lo ... ku} and possibly {la} (brivla version only) - No specific
> mention that {ku} may be left out is made. Stress the openness of xorlo {lo}
> and its specific use, and give examples that are contrary to English thought
> - {lo cnino ku}, {lo xunre ku}, etc.
> - At this point, a brief on {ko}, {ma}, {mo}, and maybe a brief mention
> of attitudinals and vocatives. (It's hard to put these off since they are so
> frequently used, but I'd make the case that they can wait a bit.)
> - {be ... bei ... be'o} - Again, making the case that the terminator is
> necessary. Strong examples help here. Usually the idea of nesting these
> within a tanru is easily taught and understood. Make a connection with the
> earlier lesson about place structure in that the "first" sumti after a
> selbri is going to be the x2.
> - SE. State that you are essentially creating a new selbri with a new
> place structure - this is a good time to potentially introduce the terms
> {gismu} and {brivla}.
> - {NU ... kei}. I only really mention {du'u} and {nu} since they are
> the simplest and by far the most common. {su'u} is potentially worth a
> mention. As always, strong detailed examples help.
> - {cu} and terminator elision. By this time, the user is going to start
> seeing very bulky phrases with 3, 4, 5 or more terminators at the end of
> their jufra. What a mess! {cu} becomes a lot easier to teach in terms of the
> "levels" it can cut through by teaching it right after NU.
> - {fi'o ... fe'u} and BAI. Since this lesson comes after terminator
> elision, {fe'u} should be mentioned but shown that it can be elided.Teaching
> {fi'o} first opens up a lot of options and gets the students more
> comfortable with tags in general.
>
> Clearly there is still a lot to teach at this point: tenses, aspects,
> connectives, fu'ivla, lujvo, etc. But I think the outline above covers a
> strong majority of the structural aspects of lojban and have had great
> success and reasonable retention when teaching students using this method.
>
> As for the web-based lessons, I had the idea of writing out lessons in this
> form (teaching more or less the full grammar in its basics) with one pass
> and branding it "Level 1". "Level 2" will then be available to the user as a
> direct overlay on the existing material. That is to say, that by checking a
> box on the website or something, they can cause new text to mix in with the
> existing lessons (probably of a different color). So the introduction
> chapter will have the same Level 1 text, but will also expand upon those
> ideas and possibly introduce more terminology for level 2. The {lo} / {la}
> chapter can expand to detail {le} and the other use of {la} as well as inner
> / outer quantifiers in level 2. The NU chapter can explain some of the finer
> points of NU and some of the other ones, {ni}, {ka}, {se du'u} vs. {du'u},
> etc. Level 3 will just be another overlay with the absolute full detail of
> the language.
>
> I await your comments and suggestions.
>

Brief comment: io sai Bravissimo. It has struck me that teaching all
terminators to beginners was probably a good idea. mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan

posts: 4740

Wow. I am very encouraged to see this. Well done.

-Eppcott

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com> wrote:
> coi lo tadni .e lo ctuca mi'e .kribacr.
>
> Greetings! As some of you may already know, myself as well as others have
> been teaching lessons on IRC for the last couple months with some pretty
> encouraging results, and I wanted to share some thoughts with the community
> about the method and "path" I/we use in our lessons. There is a Google Wave
> that is being compiled of our work, which I hope can be used as the
> foundation not only for a new learning hard copy text (incorporating xorlo
> and dotside) but as the basis for an online interactive lesson, the details
> of which I'd like to outline here and open for questions and comments.
>
> The biggest change in teaching methods and the one thing that I've noticed
> having the best impact is the up-front teaching of terminators; their use,
> and why they are important and necessary. Only after establishing this basis
> do we teach {cu} and elision, and this method has produced stronger
> understanding in when they are needed and why they are useful. I am also
> putting a stronger emphasis on teaching only the necessary terminology when
> absolutely needed. We basically go through as much as we can using only the
> terms {selbri}, {bridi}, and {sumti}. This has allowed more ground to be
> covered earlier, which then provides more of a basis and contrast for the
> student to then better grasp the more complex forms and terminology that
> comes later.
>
> Without further ado, this is a rough outline to our new methods, in the
> order in which they are taught:
>
> General introduction - a bit on "thinking lojbanically", the terms sumti,
> selbri, and bridi, a few sample bridi using only simple KOhA like {mi} {do}
> and {ti}, and trying to convey the differences between English and lojban
> and why selbri, sumti, and bridi don't really exist in English.
> A more detailed look at place structure, and how to play with it - the rules
> for sliding sumti around, and also introduce FA.
> Simple tanru, using as diverse of a vocabulary as we can muster. We teach
> with great emphasis that ANY time two selbri are adjacent in text, they form
> a tanru. This emphasis and the fact that no terminators have been introduced
> as of yet turns out to be a great aid in getting tanru formation and proper
> sumti termination / {cu} usage correct.
> {lo ... ku} and possibly {la} (brivla version only) - No specific mention
> that {ku} may be left out is made. Stress the openness of xorlo {lo} and its
> specific use, and give examples that are contrary to English thought - {lo
> cnino ku}, {lo xunre ku}, etc.
> At this point, a brief on {ko}, {ma}, {mo}, and maybe a brief mention of
> attitudinals and vocatives. (It's hard to put these off since they are so
> frequently used, but I'd make the case that they can wait a bit.)
> {be ... bei ... be'o} - Again, making the case that the terminator is
> necessary. Strong examples help here. Usually the idea of nesting these
> within a tanru is easily taught and understood. Make a connection with the
> earlier lesson about place structure in that the "first" sumti after a
> selbri is going to be the x2.
> SE. State that you are essentially creating a new selbri with a new place
> structure - this is a good time to potentially introduce the terms {gismu}
> and {brivla}.
> {NU ... kei}. I only really mention {du'u} and {nu} since they are the
> simplest and by far the most common. {su'u} is potentially worth a mention.
> As always, strong detailed examples help.
> {cu} and terminator elision. By this time, the user is going to start seeing
> very bulky phrases with 3, 4, 5 or more terminators at the end of their
> jufra. What a mess! {cu} becomes a lot easier to teach in terms of the
> "levels" it can cut through by teaching it right after NU.
> {fi'o ... fe'u} and BAI. Since this lesson comes after terminator elision,
> {fe'u} should be mentioned but shown that it can be elided.Teaching {fi'o}
> first opens up a lot of options and gets the students more comfortable with
> tags in general.
>
> Clearly there is still a lot to teach at this point: tenses, aspects,
> connectives, fu'ivla, lujvo, etc. But I think the outline above covers a
> strong majority of the structural aspects of lojban and have had great
> success and reasonable retention when teaching students using this method.
>
> As for the web-based lessons, I had the idea of writing out lessons in this
> form (teaching more or less the full grammar in its basics) with one pass
> and branding it "Level 1". "Level 2" will then be available to the user as a
> direct overlay on the existing material. That is to say, that by checking a
> box on the website or something, they can cause new text to mix in with the
> existing lessons (probably of a different color). So the introduction
> chapter will have the same Level 1 text, but will also expand upon those
> ideas and possibly introduce more terminology for level 2. The {lo} / {la}
> chapter can expand to detail {le} and the other use of {la} as well as inner
> / outer quantifiers in level 2. The NU chapter can explain some of the finer
> points of NU and some of the other ones, {ni}, {ka}, {se du'u} vs. {du'u},
> etc. Level 3 will just be another overlay with the absolute full detail of
> the language.
>
> I await your comments and suggestions.
>


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, Dec 18, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is a Google Wave
> that is being compiled of our work,

The content looks good, but I'm finding the navigation of the wave to
be a pain. The behavior of the up and down arrows especially, which
constantly make me lose the place I'm at. Maybe I'm missing something,
but I wish the arrows could be used to move one line at a time rather
than jumping from blip to blip.

> Simple tanru, using as diverse of a vocabulary as we can muster. We teach
> with great emphasis that ANY time two selbri are adjacent in text, they form
> a tanru.

Minor issue here: Your use of "selbri" is slightly non-standard. In
general, you cannot put two selbri together to form a new selbri,
because the selbri tag is considered a part of the selbri, so for
example "ca klama" is a selbri, "na djuno" is a selbri. Unfortunately,
there isn't any standard name for the tag-less part of the selbri. I
guess it could be called "tag-less selbri", but that only works once
you have introduced tags.

> {be ... bei ... be'o} - Again, making the case that the terminator is
> necessary. Strong examples help here.

The problem of teaching this structure before elision is that it is
then hard to justify. "be" is only needed because we want to elide
"ku" most of the time. If "ku" were not elidable, there would be no
point in having the be-bei-be'o structure. I think logically elision
needs to be taught before "be".

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.

posts: 19

> The content looks good, but I'm finding the navigation of the wave to
> be a pain. The behavior of the up and down arrows especially, which
> constantly make me lose the place I'm at. Maybe I'm missing something,
> but I wish the arrows could be used to move one line at a time rather
> than jumping from blip to blip.

I definitely agree here. I have barely participated in the editing of
it myself: I'm just the one generating the teaching / discussion logs
that the community then edits on my behalf. They're like my little
slaves. :-) Also a side note - I've heard that Wave works better in
(surprise surprise) Google Chrome, if you can try that.

> Minor issue here: Your use of "selbri" is slightly non-standard. In
> general, you cannot put two selbri together to form a new selbri,
> because the selbri tag is considered a part of the selbri, so for
> example "ca klama" is a selbri, "na djuno" is a selbri. Unfortunately,
> there isn't any standard name for the tag-less part of the selbri. I
> guess it could be called "tag-less selbri", but that only works once
> you have introduced tags.

I completely understand your point and figured someone would notice
this. :-) This has been a subject of discussion in IRC - xalbo, myself,
and others have gone back and forth on this. We had come up with the
term {ka'erselbri} or just {ka'e selbri} to differentiate. In
practice, this has pretty much been a non issue - negation and tags
are taught later, and they are described as being on the outside of
the "whole selbri" if you can kinda catch my drift. I wasn't able to
completely describe my style in the original post. I assure you I'm
doing the best to address the issue.

> The problem of teaching this structure before elision is that it is
> then hard to justify. "be" is only needed because we want to elide
> "ku" most of the time. If "ku" were not elidable, there would be no
> point in having the be-bei-be'o structure. I think logically elision
> needs to be taught before "be".

I really haven't had a problem justifying its existence - though I do
admit I have to rely on the tried and true "Just accept that it's
there" argument to get it into people's heads. They're fairly
accepting of it, and to be honest the timing of teaching terminator
elision has been jumping around as I teach each individual student.
Anywhere from soon after {lo ... ku} to right before they go insane -
and usually the results are positive. Terminator elision can likely be
taught alongside {be ... be'o} - I have no problem with this.

I accept your points but do wish to add that we have been pretty
successful even if we are a bit sly about it. :-) I feel like I have
had to force the student to make less assumptions using this path and
method.

mi'e .kribacr. mu'o


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, Dec 18, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com> wrote:
> Also a side note - I've heard that Wave works better in
> (surprise surprise) Google Chrome, if you can try that.

I am using Chrome actually, and I didn't notice any problems with
response times that others talk about for other browsers, but the way
the arrows work is the same ugly in Chrome.


> In
> practice, this has pretty much been a non issue - negation and tags
> are taught later, and they are described as being on the outside of
> the "whole selbri" if you can kinda catch my drift. I wasn't able to
> completely describe my style in the original post. I assure you I'm
> doing the best to address the issue.

OK. Arguments can be made both ways as to what is better. Since you
can say things like "lo ca klama", if "ca" is not part of the selbri
you have to specify that it's not just a selbri that can be converted
into a sumti with "lo", but a selbri plus its tag.

I don't expect this to be much of a problem in informal teaching, but
when you write it down more formally you have to consider that it may
end up being used as a reference work in the future, so it's better to
keep things as consistent as possible.


> I really haven't had a problem justifying its existence - though I do
> admit I have to rely on the tried and true "Just accept that it's
> there" argument to get it into people's heads.

In the wave there is a comment:

<Suprano> I don’t see why we need the {be} yet

which is unanswered. When I tried to think of an answer, I realized
that in fact we *don't* need it, except to make "ku" more elidable.

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.

posts: 493

What do you mean "we don't need it"? How else would you say {mi klama be lo
zarci be'o djica fi lo nu cpacu lo nanba}? Here is a selbri which is a
tanru made up of two gismu each of which need stuff put into their x2 place.
How can that be done without {be}?

2009/12/18 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>

> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Also a side note - I've heard that Wave works better in
> > (surprise surprise) Google Chrome, if you can try that.
>
> I am using Chrome actually, and I didn't notice any problems with
> response times that others talk about for other browsers, but the way
> the arrows work is the same ugly in Chrome.
>
>
> > In
> > practice, this has pretty much been a non issue - negation and tags
> > are taught later, and they are described as being on the outside of
> > the "whole selbri" if you can kinda catch my drift. I wasn't able to
> > completely describe my style in the original post. I assure you I'm
> > doing the best to address the issue.
>
> OK. Arguments can be made both ways as to what is better. Since you
> can say things like "lo ca klama", if "ca" is not part of the selbri
> you have to specify that it's not just a selbri that can be converted
> into a sumti with "lo", but a selbri plus its tag.
>
> I don't expect this to be much of a problem in informal teaching, but
> when you write it down more formally you have to consider that it may
> end up being used as a reference work in the future, so it's better to
> keep things as consistent as possible.
>
>
> > I really haven't had a problem justifying its existence - though I do
> > admit I have to rely on the tried and true "Just accept that it's
> > there" argument to get it into people's heads.
>
> In the wave there is a comment:
>
> <Suprano> I don’t see why we need the {be} yet
>
> which is unanswered. When I tried to think of an answer, I realized
> that in fact we *don't* need it, except to make "ku" more elidable.
>
> 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.
>
>

posts: 86 United States

I'm guessing that the wave isn't public, seeing as I'm incapable of doing
anything on it. The things which I wished to say are:

Pronunciation is spelled incorrectly as Pron*o*unciation in Lesson 1.

Another way to say "I live in a red, French-style house":

xunre fraso zdani mi

2009/12/18 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>

> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Also a side note - I've heard that Wave works better in
> > (surprise surprise) Google Chrome, if you can try that.
>
> I am using Chrome actually, and I didn't notice any problems with
> response times that others talk about for other browsers, but the way
> the arrows work is the same ugly in Chrome.
>
>
> > In
> > practice, this has pretty much been a non issue - negation and tags
> > are taught later, and they are described as being on the outside of
> > the "whole selbri" if you can kinda catch my drift. I wasn't able to
> > completely describe my style in the original post. I assure you I'm
> > doing the best to address the issue.
>
> OK. Arguments can be made both ways as to what is better. Since you
> can say things like "lo ca klama", if "ca" is not part of the selbri
> you have to specify that it's not just a selbri that can be converted
> into a sumti with "lo", but a selbri plus its tag.
>
> I don't expect this to be much of a problem in informal teaching, but
> when you write it down more formally you have to consider that it may
> end up being used as a reference work in the future, so it's better to
> keep things as consistent as possible.
>
>
> > I really haven't had a problem justifying its existence - though I do
> > admit I have to rely on the tried and true "Just accept that it's
> > there" argument to get it into people's heads.
>
> In the wave there is a comment:
>
> <Suprano> I don’t see why we need the {be} yet
>
> which is unanswered. When I tried to think of an answer, I realized
> that in fact we *don't* need it, except to make "ku" more elidable.
>
> 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.
>
>


--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

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

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Jorge Llambas wrote:

>> In
>> practice, this has pretty much been a non issue - negation and tags
>> are taught later, and they are described as being on the outside of
>> the "whole selbri" if you can kinda catch my drift. I wasn't able to
>> completely describe my style in the original post. I assure you I'm
>> doing the best to address the issue.
>
> OK. Arguments can be made both ways as to what is better. Since you
> can say things like "lo ca klama", if "ca" is not part of the selbri
> you have to specify that it's not just a selbri that can be converted
> into a sumti with "lo", but a selbri plus its tag.
>
> I don't expect this to be much of a problem in informal teaching, but
> when you write it down more formally you have to consider that it may
> end up being used as a reference work in the future, so it's better to
> keep things as consistent as possible.

I guess I hadn't thought of {ca klama} as a selbri. I had considered it as a
selbri tcita ({ca}) attached to a selbri ({klama}). But it's possible that
was I was thinking of as selbri is more what has been called "tanru unit", but
that seems even more complicated.

Perhaps the solution is to not claim that {lo ... ku} can convert only selbri
into sumti, but just claim that it can convert selbri into sumti, and leave
other constructs for later, when they've been introduced on their own.

>> I really haven't had a problem justifying its existence - though I do
>> admit I have to rely on the tried and true "Just accept that it's
>> there" argument to get it into people's heads.
>
> In the wave there is a comment:
>
> <Suprano> I dont see why we need the {be} yet
>
> which is unanswered. When I tried to think of an answer, I realized
> that in fact we *don't* need it, except to make "ku" more elidable.

Yes, it would have been possible to make {lo ... ku} convert a bridi (with
empty x1, or maybe even {ke'a}) into a sumti. Under that model, {ku} would be
elidable far less frequently. We'd also get internal sumti in tanru as {mi
zdani do klama} instead of {mi zdani be do be'o klama}. I think lojban did
make a good trade off here, but it's hard to explain the reasoning without
mentioning the elidability.

If we had enough students, we could try a lot of variations. Teaching the
terminators as an actual part of the construct, which can in some cases be
omitted if doing so doesn't cause a different parse, does seem to produce much
better results than teaching them as something extra that needs to be added at
odd times.

It might be possible to teach elidability right after {lo ... ku}, but hold
off on {cu} until considerably later (after {NU ... kei}, for instance). It
would still encourage use of terminators when they actually matter, but would
explain why {be ... bei ... be'o} are needed. Something to ponder.

mi'e la xalbo mu'o
--
Adam Lopresto
http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/

"I have a very firm grasp on reality! I can reach out and strangle it any time!"

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> What do you mean "we don't need it"?  How else would you say {mi klama be lo
> zarci be'o djica fi lo nu cpacu lo nanba}?  Here is a selbri which is a
> tanru made up of two gismu each of which need stuff put into their x2 place.
>  How can that be done without {be}?

IF "ku" were not elidable, then we would not need the be-bei-be'o construction.

In that case, we would say: "mi klama lo zarci ku djica" and "lo zarci
ku" would fill the x2 of klama without any need for "be", and "klama
lo zarci ku" would form a tanru with "djica". That's not grammatical
with the current grammar, but the reason is so "ku" is elidable most
of the time.

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, Dec 18, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Jon "Top Hat" Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm guessing that the wave isn't public, seeing as I'm incapable of doing
> anything on it.

It's sort of public, but it's hard to figure out how it works. I
couldn't do anything either a couple of days ago, I tried to add
myself to the wave and nothing visible happened. Today I discovered
that I was suddenly able to edit, and that I had been added to it. I
don't know if this is due to some delayed effect of my trying to add
myself, or if someone else added me.

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, Dec 18, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Adam D. Lopresto <adam@pubcrawler.org> wrote:
>
> I guess I hadn't thought of {ca klama} as a selbri.

I'm probably very influenced by the use in the formal grammars, where
the tag is clearly a part of the construction called "selbri".

> I had considered it as a
> selbri tcita ({ca}) attached to a selbri ({klama}).  But it's possible that
> was I was thinking of as selbri is more what has been called "tanru unit",
> but that seems even more complicated.

"tanru-unit" is what it is called in the formal grammar, but of course
such things need not be part of any tanru, so that name is also weird.
Also, "broda je brode" and "broda co brode" are selbri but not
tanru-units for the formal grammar.


> Teaching the
> terminators as an actual part of the construct, which can in some cases be
> omitted if doing so doesn't cause a different parse, does seem to produce
> much
> better results than teaching them as something extra that needs to be added
> at odd times.

Yes, definitely. That's how they are presented in CLL, and that's how
they were taught in the original lessons by lojbab. I think it was
Lojban for Beginners that deviated from that.

> It might be possible to teach elidability right after {lo ... ku}, but hold
> off on {cu} until considerably later (after {NU ... kei}, for instance).

I don't see the advantage of holding off on "cu". Forgetting "cu" is
probably the most common mistake that beginners make. I think the best
way to present terminators is to write sentences initially as "lo
mlatu ku cu blabi vau", showing both that the terminator is there,
and that it is elidable. Or maybe I just like that method because
that's how they were taught to me, and it always seemed very clear.

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.

posts: 19

> I don't see the advantage of holding off on "cu". Forgetting "cu" is
> probably the most common mistake that beginners make. I think the best
> way to present terminators is to write sentences initially as "lo
> mlatu ku cu blabi vau", showing both that the terminator is there,
> and that it is elidable. Or maybe I just like that method because
> that's how they were taught to me, and it always seemed very clear.

I can buy that. Different things definitely work for different people.
I'm sure some of my personal experience (and thus bias) has leaked
into my method of teaching - I've been dodging the things that were
hard to grasp at first. It may not be necessarily easier to learn
terminators how I teach them, but it sure has been easier for me to
teach them how I teach them. :-)

The whole tanru-unit-maybe-a-selbri-but-not-really-one thing has been
a sticking point. I like this new method but it does still seem to be
a little bit disingenuous in teaching what selbri *actually* are. Adam
was certainly better at explaining what I was trying to get at than I
was. (Thanks, xalbo!)

> If we had enough students, we could try a lot of variations.  Teaching the
> terminators as an actual part of the construct, which can in some cases be
> omitted if doing so doesn't cause a different parse, does seem to produce much
> better results than teaching them as something extra that needs to be added at
> odd times.

I'm trying my best to recruit {rau tadni}!

I think a solid community effort and a bit of testing and flexibility
can put our current collective efforts into a coherent and solid
teaching medium. While I may be championing it, I'm definitely not the
only man behind the movement. (As much as I'd like to take credit for
it...) xalbo, donri, all of my other co-teachers and of course my
ever-so-patient students deserve just as much credit as I do.

Thanks everyone for your feedback on the structure! Anyone have any
comments about the layout idea I had for the website?


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.

posts: 4740

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks everyone for your feedback on the structure! Anyone have any
> comments about the layout idea I had for the website?

Sorry, can you point me to that? -Eppcott


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.

posts: 99 United States

Interested in the site layout as well, although all I see is this brief set
of specs:

zoi

As for the web-based lessons, I had the idea of writing out lessons in this
form (teaching more or less the full grammar in its basics) with one pass
and branding it "Level 1". "Level 2" will then be available to the user as a
direct overlay on the existing material. That is to say, that by checking a
box on the website or something, they can cause new text to mix in with the
existing lessons (probably of a different color). So the introduction
chapter will have the same Level 1 text, but will also expand upon those
ideas and possibly introduce more terminology for level 2. The {lo} / {la}
chapter can expand to detail {le} and the other use of {la} as well as inner
/ outer quantifiers in level 2. The NU chapter can explain some of the finer
points of NU and some of the other ones, {ni}, {ka}, {se du'u} vs. {du'u},
etc. Level 3 will just be another overlay with the absolute full detail of
the language.

li'u

...I don't really see Google Wave as the solution for this, even with the
supposed freedom of 'inviting bots' into waves. I know it's 'cutting edge'
but it's also exclusive (you still need to be invited), and not terribly
accessible (even tech-savvy people find it tricky to navigate, and not all
lojban students will be tech-savvy!)

I've actually chewed on the idea of a lojban-learning website for a while
now, basically using the same premise as your above specifications; that
there would be 'individualized' lessons of various difficulty that drew from
lessons that users had already studied. The way I envisioned this was some
Drupal-ish content-driven site like this:

1) content type: vocab word (mostly gismu)




mu'a
xamgu
x1 (object/event) is good/beneficial/nice/acceptable for x2 by standard x3

this means "good," but really, you should use a more descriptive word, cmon!

2) content type: examples (used in lessons)






mu'a
mi xamgu
'I' 'good/beneficial'
I'm beneficial
Note: this doesn't mean "I'm doing well!"

3) content type: grammar point (mostly cmavo)







mu'a
link1: lo
link2: ku
{lo ... ku}
"<some> ...(noun)... <end-some>"
This means some real instance of something.
Note: this doesn't mean necessarily plural.
ex: (links to example sentence, content type 2)

4) content type: lesson point






mu'a
intro: "Well, you know there's place structure, but how do you fill in those
places? We need to tag the sumti with some lo's and ku's! Right on!"
link: grammar point, content type 3
explanation: "We need these to make sure we know where arguments begin and
end. Otherwise we'd just have run-on tanru."

5) content type: lesson template





This last content type would be optional in my book, but would allow for
long, structured lesson design like what's going on on the wave. I think
these are great references and certainly some people prefer this type of
study, so they're good to keep. But I also think that if a user has gone
through a set of 'lesson points' they could be presented with a list of
lesson titles (like the above "What's an attitudinal?") that are
automatically selected by the amount of 'new' material in the lesson. Each
lesson point would be treated like a blog entry, and so people could see the
latest updates, browse by title etc, but also have the option of doing
sequential 'chapters.'

I hope that was clear... welcome feedback!

mu'o mi'e .ku'us

On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 09:44, Matt Arnold <matt.mattarn@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Thanks everyone for your feedback on the structure! Anyone have any
> > comments about the layout idea I had for the website?
>
> Sorry, can you point me to that? -Eppcott
>
>
> 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.
>
>

posts: 99 United States

edit: Oops! The lesson-point title I actually used in my example was "Make a
sentence: fill in some sumti," not "what's an attitudinal?" Though that
would be a good lesson point too.

mu'o mi'e .ku'us

On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:00, Oren <get.oren@gmail.com> wrote:

> Interested in the site layout as well, although all I see is this brief set
> of specs:
>
> zoi
>
>
> As for the web-based lessons, I had the idea of writing out lessons in this
> form (teaching more or less the full grammar in its basics) with one pass
> and branding it "Level 1". "Level 2" will then be available to the user as a
> direct overlay on the existing material. That is to say, that by checking a
> box on the website or something, they can cause new text to mix in with the
> existing lessons (probably of a different color). So the introduction
> chapter will have the same Level 1 text, but will also expand upon those
> ideas and possibly introduce more terminology for level 2. The {lo} / {la}
> chapter can expand to detail {le} and the other use of {la} as well as inner
> / outer quantifiers in level 2. The NU chapter can explain some of the finer
> points of NU and some of the other ones, {ni}, {ka}, {se du'u} vs. {du'u},
> etc. Level 3 will just be another overlay with the absolute full detail of
> the language.
>
> li'u
>
> ...I don't really see Google Wave as the solution for this, even with the
> supposed freedom of 'inviting bots' into waves. I know it's 'cutting edge'
> but it's also exclusive (you still need to be invited), and not terribly
> accessible (even tech-savvy people find it tricky to navigate, and not all
> lojban students will be tech-savvy!)
>
> I've actually chewed on the idea of a lojban-learning website for a while
> now, basically using the same premise as your above specifications; that
> there would be 'individualized' lessons of various difficulty that drew from
> lessons that users had already studied. The way I envisioned this was some
> Drupal-ish content-driven site like this:
>
> 1) content type: vocab word (mostly gismu)
> --- contains formal definition
> --- contains moderator-added notes for newbs
>
> mu'a
> xamgu
> x1 (object/event) is good/beneficial/nice/acceptable for x2 by standard
> x3
> this means "good," but really, you should use a more descriptive word,
> cmon!
>
> 2) content type: examples (used in lessons)
> --- contains sentence
> --- contains gloss
> --- contains translation
> --- contains note
>
> mu'a
> mi xamgu
> 'I' 'good/beneficial'
> I'm beneficial
> Note: this doesn't mean "I'm doing well!"
>
> 3) content type: grammar point (mostly cmavo)
> --- links to any dependent words (i.e. lo... ku would link to lo and ku)
> --- grammar visualization (text)
> --- grammar gloss
> --- grammar note
> --- links to any number of example sentences to demonstrate usage
>
> mu'a
> link1: lo
> link2: ku
> {lo ... ku}
> "<some> ...(noun)... <end-some>"
> This means some real instance of something.
> Note: this doesn't mean necessarily plural.
> ex: (links to example sentence, content type 2)
>
> 4) content type: lesson point
> --- title (i.e. "Make a sentence: fill in some sumti.")
> --- intro
> --- link to grammar point
> --- explanation
>
> mu'a
> intro: "Well, you know there's place structure, but how do you fill in
> those places? We need to tag the sumti with some lo's and ku's! Right on!"
> link: grammar point, content type 3
> explanation: "We need these to make sure we know where arguments begin and
> end. Otherwise we'd just have run-on tanru."
>
> 5) content type: lesson template
> --- title (something like "the basics: you, me, and bridi")
> --- segways 1...n
> --- lesson points 1...n
>
> This last content type would be optional in my book, but would allow for
> long, structured lesson design like what's going on on the wave. I think
> these are great references and certainly some people prefer this type of
> study, so they're good to keep. But I also think that if a user has gone
> through a set of 'lesson points' they could be presented with a list of
> lesson titles (like the above "What's an attitudinal?") that are
> automatically selected by the amount of 'new' material in the lesson. Each
> lesson point would be treated like a blog entry, and so people could see the
> latest updates, browse by title etc, but also have the option of doing
> sequential 'chapters.'
>
> I hope that was clear... welcome feedback!
>
> mu'o mi'e .ku'us
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 09:44, Matt Arnold <matt.mattarn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Thanks everyone for your feedback on the structure! Anyone have any
>> > comments about the layout idea I had for the website?
>>
>> Sorry, can you point me to that? -Eppcott
>>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>

Just a passing thought but maybe, after fifty five years of ever more arcane terminology (rarely well-defined — or even consistently), it might be time to go back to standard terminology from Logic or Linguistics (or, practically, both) and do the whole thing — now that we have some notion of what the whole thing is — right.



--- Original Message --
From: Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Sent: Fri, December 18, 2009 6:16:58 PM
Subject: lojban Re: The New Method

> I don't see the advantage of holding off on "cu". Forgetting "cu" is
> probably the most common mistake that beginners make. I think the best
> way to present terminators is to write sentences initially as "lo
> mlatu ku cu blabi vau", showing both that the terminator is there,
> and that it is elidable. Or maybe I just like that method because
> that's how they were taught to me, and it always seemed very clear.

I can buy that. Different things definitely work for different people.
I'm sure some of my personal experience (and thus bias) has leaked
into my method of teaching - I've been dodging the things that were
hard to grasp at first. It may not be necessarily easier to learn
terminators how I teach them, but it sure has been easier for me to
teach them how I teach them. :-)

The whole tanru-unit-maybe-a-selbri-but-not-really-one thing has been
a sticking point. I like this new method but it does still seem to be
a little bit disingenuous in teaching what selbri *actually* are. Adam
was certainly better at explaining what I was trying to get at than I
was. (Thanks, xalbo!)

> If we had enough students, we could try a lot of variations. Teaching the
> terminators as an actual part of the construct, which can in some cases be
> omitted if doing so doesn't cause a different parse, does seem to produce much
> better results than teaching them as something extra that needs to be added at
> odd times.

I'm trying my best to recruit {rau tadni}!

I think a solid community effort and a bit of testing and flexibility
can put our current collective efforts into a coherent and solid
teaching medium. While I may be championing it, I'm definitely not the
only man behind the movement. (As much as I'd like to take credit for
it...) xalbo, donri, all of my other co-teachers and of course my
ever-so-patient students deserve just as much credit as I do.

Thanks everyone for your feedback on the structure! Anyone have any
comments about the layout idea I had for the website?


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.





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.

posts: 19

>> Thanks everyone for your feedback on the structure! Anyone have any
>> comments about the layout idea I had for the website?
>
> Sorry, can you point me to that? -Eppcott

Woops! Should have made that more clear.

I was just referring to the last paragraph of my original email
wherein I offer up an idea for the structure of the lessons. This
lesson plan was something I had intended to move beyond the Wave, but
I lack the web design skill likely necessary to implement such a
thing. When I teach, I crave the interactivity and automatic feedback.
Designing a lesson structure with dynamic collapsing and expanding of
information as you progress is just one way I might be able to capture
some of that dynamic. Really strong examples and test questions have
helped quite a bit in cementing ideas.

I've been mentally compiling a list of commonly asked questions as I
teach each subject. Likewise, I've been compiling a list of commonly
made mistakes... {se broda be fa ko'a} seems to crop up no matter how
artfully I try to dodge it, for example.

I think donri has been spearheading a project wherein he gives
stronger definitions of gismu in both summary and expanded form. A lot
of them can be very deceptive when read from gismu lists on what fills
what places - I think a mouse-over interface that gives a better
detail of the definition, and a few examples of what can fill each
place successfully would go a long way in teaching place structure
properly.

Later today I might post a fake-up of what I'd like to see some of
these things looking like.


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.

posts: 99 United States

is there any chance of lojban.org donating a subdomain or directory to
development of a learning website like Jameson Orndorff is describing?
I for one would be thrilled to help in development.

mu'o mi'e .ku'us.

On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 02:20, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Thanks everyone for your feedback on the structure! Anyone have any
> >> comments about the layout idea I had for the website?
> >
> > Sorry, can you point me to that? -Eppcott
>
> Woops! Should have made that more clear.
>
> I was just referring to the last paragraph of my original email
> wherein I offer up an idea for the structure of the lessons. This
> lesson plan was something I had intended to move beyond the Wave, but
> I lack the web design skill likely necessary to implement such a
> thing. When I teach, I crave the interactivity and automatic feedback.
> Designing a lesson structure with dynamic collapsing and expanding of
> information as you progress is just one way I might be able to capture
> some of that dynamic. Really strong examples and test questions have
> helped quite a bit in cementing ideas.
>
> I've been mentally compiling a list of commonly asked questions as I
> teach each subject. Likewise, I've been compiling a list of commonly
> made mistakes... {se broda be fa ko'a} seems to crop up no matter how
> artfully I try to dodge it, for example.
>
> I think donri has been spearheading a project wherein he gives
> stronger definitions of gismu in both summary and expanded form. A lot
> of them can be very deceptive when read from gismu lists on what fills
> what places - I think a mouse-over interface that gives a better
> detail of the definition, and a few examples of what can fill each
> place successfully would go a long way in teaching place structure
> properly.
>
> Later today I might post a fake-up of what I'd like to see some of
> these things looking like.
>
>
> 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.
>


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.

posts: 42

I'm sorry but I'm having trouble finding the wave. I'd certainly like to
join the discussion, if I can. How would I find it? I tried searching for
"with:public orndorff" and "with:public lojban". Is there a different
search term I should use?

mi'e xuinkrbin.

2009/12/19 Oren <get.oren@gmail.com>

> is there any chance of lojban.org donating a subdomain or directory to
> development of a learning website like Jameson Orndorff is describing?
> I for one would be thrilled to help in development.
>
> mu'o mi'e .ku'us.
>
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 02:20, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > >> Thanks everyone for your feedback on the structure! Anyone have any
> > >> comments about the layout idea I had for the website?
> > >
> > > Sorry, can you point me to that? -Eppcott
> >
> > Woops! Should have made that more clear.
> >
> > I was just referring to the last paragraph of my original email
> > wherein I offer up an idea for the structure of the lessons. This
> > lesson plan was something I had intended to move beyond the Wave, but
> > I lack the web design skill likely necessary to implement such a
> > thing. When I teach, I crave the interactivity and automatic feedback.
> > Designing a lesson structure with dynamic collapsing and expanding of
> > information as you progress is just one way I might be able to capture
> > some of that dynamic. Really strong examples and test questions have
> > helped quite a bit in cementing ideas.
> >
> > I've been mentally compiling a list of commonly asked questions as I
> > teach each subject. Likewise, I've been compiling a list of commonly
> > made mistakes... {se broda be fa ko'a} seems to crop up no matter how
> > artfully I try to dodge it, for example.
> >
> > I think donri has been spearheading a project wherein he gives
> > stronger definitions of gismu in both summary and expanded form. A lot
> > of them can be very deceptive when read from gismu lists on what fills
> > what places - I think a mouse-over interface that gives a better
> > detail of the definition, and a few examples of what can fill each
> > place successfully would go a long way in teaching place structure
> > properly.
> >
> > Later today I might post a fake-up of what I'd like to see some of
> > these things looking like.
> >
> >
> > 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.
> >
>
>
> 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.
>
>