Original orthography draft now online for critique Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 Use this thread to discuss the Original orthography draft now online for critique page.
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 My first draft has been uploaded to http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Original%20lojban%20orthography Please comment and make suggestions, I'm open to drastic reformations. I'm also looking for a name for it. 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.
Posted by timonator on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 85851 LakMeer Kravid wrote: > My first draft has been uploaded to > http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Original%20lojban%20orthography > Please comment and make suggestions, I'm open to drastic reformations. > I'm also looking for a name for it. > mu'o The script really looks beautiful. I wrote a short text to check it out, but currently my scanner is broken ("Document feeder jammed"!?), so I can't upload it. I have discovered one problem with your orthography: Without a mechanism to identify stress, it's impossible to write spaceless style with it Also there is no dot style for "in between", as it would happen in dotside-like names {la.timos. for example}. Another thing is that I'm not really sure, if it's really a good idea to have "s" be just a dash, even though it really does make sense in that quadrangle concept thingie. It might be possible to use a small (or big) flick below the letters to mark stressed syllables, but i'm not sure how to remedy the S thing. Looking forward to an even better version - Timo PS: It really was jammed... By the switch with the "lock" icon on the bottom side of the scanner. What a bebna I am! Here's the scan http://perpetuum-immobile.de/lojban/lakmir.png 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.
Posted by Anonymous on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 9:01 PM, LakMeer Kravid <lakmeerkravid@gmail.com> wrote: > My first draft has been uploaded to > http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Original%20lojban%20orthography > Please comment and make suggestions, I'm open to drastic reformations. > I'm also looking for a name for it. It looks good. My suggestion for the vowels is that you interchange e and i, and also a and u, that way the patterns make more sense, and also the diphthongs get the lighter symbols. You can't omit the spaces after brivla if you don't mark the stress in some other way. 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.
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 11:45 PM, Timo Paulssen <timonator@perpetuum-immobile.de> wrote: > > The script really looks beautiful. Thanks! My girlfriend helped me pretty it up a lot, she does calligraphy. > I have discovered...it's impossible to write spaceless style with it The whole spaceless thing isn't really a big deal, it was just an aesthetic demonstration Please don't get hung up about it. > Another thing is that I'm not really sure, if it's really a good idea to > have "s" be just a dash, even though it really does make sense in that > quadrangle concept thingie. > It might be possible to use a small (or big) flick below the letters to > mark stressed syllables, but i'm not sure how to remedy the S thing. I completed rev1 some weeks ago, and rev2 is already quite healthy. I'm going with a bar that floats above the letters in a Devanagari sort of way to mark stresses, mainly thinking of notating cmene. The S is a bit dodgy looking in that version of the font, because the kerning is all equal and the text looks really drawn out. I'll post rev2 when I can, where the kerning has been adjusted to be a bit more natural and the S is a bit clearer. On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 12:28 AM, Jorge LlambÃas <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote: > > My suggestion for the vowels is that you interchange e and i, > and also a and u, that way the patterns make more sense, and also the > diphthongs get the lighter symbols. Funny you should say, this is originally how I had them! I changed them because I'm also working on a simplified, non-cursive version for everyday handwriting, where the vowels simplify to characters which resemble logical operators while matching the cmavo. That is to say, when you write {.e} it looks like ∧ and {.a} looks like ∨. As for whether this nifty feature take precedence over the more intuitive arrangement, I humbly ask this list for advice. Thanks for your comments! All criticisms are welcomed.
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 12:28 AM, Jorge LlambÃas <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 9:01 PM, LakMeer Kravid <lakmeerkravid@gmail.com> wrote: > > My first draft has been uploaded to > > http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Original%20lojban%20orthography > > Please comment and make suggestions, I'm open to drastic reformations. > > I'm also looking for a name for it. > > It looks good. My suggestion for the vowels is that you interchange e and i, > and also a and u, that way the patterns make more sense, and also the > diphthongs get the lighter symbols. > > You can't omit the spaces after brivla if you don't mark the stress in some > other way. > > 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.
Posted by Anonymous on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT I'd say somewhere a bit above the middle of the range of proposals (a B of some sort — roughly on a par with the Latin alphabet). Having to go back to dot the 'i's is a defect as is the fact that the use of diacritics for phoneme distinction increases the likelihood of misspellings and/or misreadings. That aside. the various symbols are fairly distinct, though perhaps unduly complex. It is unclear whether in a running hand the difference between a loop and a point will be maintained — the misreading problem again. But it does look nice — in a Thai-Armenian sort of way. --- Original Message -- From: LakMeer Kravid <lakmeerkravid@gmail.com> To: lojban-list@lojban.org Sent: Saturday, April 5, 2008 7:01:04 PM Subject: lojban Original orthography draft now online for critique My first draft has been uploaded to http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Original%20lojban%20orthography Please comment and make suggestions, I'm open to drastic reformations. I'm also looking for a name for it. 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. You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com 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.
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:40 AM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote: > I'd say somewhere a bit above the middle of the range of proposals (a B of some sort — roughly on a par with the Latin alphabet). Having to go back to dot the 'i's is a defect as is the fact that the use of diacritics for phoneme distinction increases the likelihood of misspellings and/or misreadings. That aside. the various symbols are fairly distinct, though perhaps unduly complex. It is unclear whether in a running hand the difference between a loop and a point will be maintained. Thanks for your critique, you raise some valid points. The 'i-dotting' mechanism is I feel, the weakest part of my proposal. I haven't found a better mechanism yet, and I am fond of the diacritics so for now it is unchanged. The distinction between round and point is something i wasted many-a sheet of paper testing. I'm convinced it works. Some characters are complex, but they still flow from the pen naturally, so I don't consider it an issue. I'm intrigued to hear you give the system a 'B' as you said - to which proposal would you give an 'A'? Perhaps we can mingle the best points from both. 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.
Posted by Anonymous on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT I don't actually speak Farsi, but one of my friends from high school does, and she was showing me one time how to write the letters. (The standard, at least in Iran, is to use Arabic script.) I don't actually remember the letters, but I do remember that there are dots that differentiate some of the letters (which in informal handwriting, two dots above can be replaced with a line, and three dots above can be replaced with a circle) and that they are put in after the word is written. So those two "issues" are no worse than a common orthography for a common language. (And if the Arabic language uses the same features in it's orthography, which I would expect unless hearing otherwise, one of the word-ancestors of lojban.) Also, Farsi doesn't even use any letters for half their vowels, so this is actually clearer. On the other hand, it might be that most people here are more interested in "best possible" rather than "better than some existing thing". To those people, my previous paragraph would seem completely irrelevant. Now about the orthography itself, I think it looks beautiful. I see a common theme that all the letters in the chart have beginning and endings at the same height (except for the glottal stop symbols), making it appear that the alignment of the whole thing is based on the line (which again reminds me of the Arabic script) rather than based on writing things between lines (as is often done with Latin letters). I can't quite tell from the chart whether the top circle/loop in the p/b shape is supposed to be written as a loop in the same stroke or a circle to be added after the word is completed. One of those handwriting charts with the arrows that tells how to draw the letters might be helpful. (In second and third grade when I was learning cursive script, the teachers had those charts across the top of the chalkboard and smaller ones across the top of each student's desk. I don't know how common that is, if anyone else is going to have any idea what I'm talking about.) This point is more about the description, rather than the orthography itself: Reading your description in the "Notes" section, I'm not sure what you're referring to with the "stroke diacritic". When I look at letters that differ only by stop/fricative, I see no single diacritic that differs any of them. p/f look upside-down. k/x are completely different. t/s are completely different. The only mark I see on the chart at all that I could see being called a diacritic, other than the flick, is the slash-looking thing that differentiates s/c and z/j and '/x. But all of these sounds are fricatives. The difference between the pairs of sibilants appears to be differentiating between alveolar and post-alveolar, and the '/x would be between glottal and velar. But again, I see this as a modification to be made to the description, not the orthography. If we wanted to have every mark and stroke mean the same phonetic detail in every situation, a different orthographic style entirely would be needed. Which might be a fun exercise for someone who has the time, but that isn't something that has to be done to *this* orthography. Also, it might be easier for readers if on the non-cursive chart, you still include the latin letters they represent, so that they don't have to go back and forth as much between the two pages. If someone who knows how to design a font would make one for this orthography, I would probably use it. This would probably be easier to do with the not-cursive version, but that's just my intuition. I don't actually know anything about font design. mu'omi'e skaryzgik. ---Original Message--- From: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org mailto:lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org On Behalf Of John E Clifford Sent: Sunday, 06 April, 2008 9:40 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: lojban Re: Original orthography draft now online for critique I'd say somewhere a bit above the middle of the range of proposals (a B of some sort — roughly on a par with the Latin alphabet). Having to go back to dot the 'i's is a defect as is the fact that the use of diacritics for phoneme distinction increases the likelihood of misspellings and/or misreadings. That aside. the various symbols are fairly distinct, though perhaps unduly complex. It is unclear whether in a running hand the difference between a loop and a point will be maintained — the misreading problem again. But it does look nice — in a Thai-Armenian sort of way. --- Original Message -- From: LakMeer Kravid <lakmeerkravid@gmail.com> To: lojban-list@lojban.org Sent: Saturday, April 5, 2008 7:01:04 PM Subject: lojban Original orthography draft now online for critique My first draft has been uploaded to http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Original%20lojban%20orthograp hy Please comment and make suggestions, I'm open to drastic reformations. I'm also looking for a name for it. 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. You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com 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.
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 Thanks for your response. I apologise for my confusing description, my familiarity with linguistics is casual at best. You would know much better than I, how correct my description is because I'm operating on my intuitive concepts of phonology. So, sorry about that. The diacritics and strokes are as you say, not strictly limited to the ideas of vocalisation and, in the case of the fricative property, my idea of what 'fricative' means is clearly inaccurate. nonetheless, such distinctions aren't necessary for actually writing with it, as you said. Oh, and it's already a font! The images on the wiki are screenshots of notepad with a TTF. Also: Please ignore the non-cursive chart for now. It's very underdeveloped. I'll update it when the calligraphic script is more mature. 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.
Posted by Anonymous on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT Alas, I was doing this from memory; my set of Lojban scripts has disappeared into some archive which in turn has gone onto one of the forty or so disks lying around. I can in fact find only one or two other actual scripts and a discussion about how to best do things given that we want an analytic script (i.e., one that indicates the significant phonological features of each phoneme in the structure of the character). Since I more or less automatically give thoroughly analytic scripts Cs or below (characters automatically blur into clusters that are going to be misread), looking at these has no point. As I recall (and this is from more than a decade ago, I am pretty sure — maybe a whole wifetime ago), the A scripts gave each character a distinctive outline — typically two (redundancy) distinctive marks — and had a complexity roughly matched to the frequency of occurrence (inversely rather). The big problems then were that most of the characters were rather complex and that (more or less consequently) cursive forms did not come naturally. I remember someone saying that they could not code many of the characters into the printers of the time (24 pin dot matrix?). None would have been an A+ then, but maybe some of this gives some direction (but note that I personally, having gotten used to Latin alphabet skimming, don't see the point of changing anyhow). --- Original Message -- From: LakMeer Kravid <lakmeerkravid@gmail.com> To: lojban-list@lojban.org Sent: Sunday, April 6, 2008 9:54:28 AM Subject: lojban Re: Original orthography draft now online for critique On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:40 AM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote: > I'd say somewhere a bit above the middle of the range of proposals (a B of some sort — roughly on a par with the Latin alphabet). Having to go back to dot the 'i's is a defect as is the fact that the use of diacritics for phoneme distinction increases the likelihood of misspellings and/or misreadings. That aside. the various symbols are fairly distinct, though perhaps unduly complex. It is unclear whether in a running hand the difference between a loop and a point will be maintained. Thanks for your critique, you raise some valid points. The 'i-dotting' mechanism is I feel, the weakest part of my proposal. I haven't found a better mechanism yet, and I am fond of the diacritics so for now it is unchanged. The distinction between round and point is something i wasted many-a sheet of paper testing. I'm convinced it works. Some characters are complex, but they still flow from the pen naturally, so I don't consider it an issue. I'm intrigued to hear you give the system a 'B' as you said - to which proposal would you give an 'A'? Perhaps we can mingle the best points from both. 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. You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com 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.
Posted by eyeonus on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 86 I don't like the 's' at all, it's too easy to miss that it's even there. Maybe give it kind of a hump, like _|\_ only not as pronounced? I don't like p/b, but only because I don't like the second loop of p/b: I feel that the character as it is but without the top loop would be better. I'd like a less convoluted f/v, as well, but it's no big deal to me. I like the idea of pre/post stops, but there's the difficulty of things like {la .djan.djonz.}: would the internal '.' be pre- or post-? Or both combined? Or a different character entirely? That said, I think it's nice, and I'd much like to see the final result. On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 1:36 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote: > Alas, I was doing this from memory; my set of Lojban scripts has > disappeared into some archive which in turn has gone onto one of the forty > or so disks lying around. I can in fact find only one or two other actual > scripts and a discussion about how to best do things given that we want an > analytic script (i.e., one that indicates the significant phonological > features of each phoneme in the structure of the character). Since I more > or less automatically give thoroughly analytic scripts Cs or below > (characters automatically blur into clusters that are going to be misread), > looking at these has no point. As I recall (and this is from more than a > decade ago, I am pretty sure — maybe a whole wifetime ago), the A scripts > gave each character a distinctive outline — typically two (redundancy) > distinctive marks — and had a complexity roughly matched to the > frequency of occurrence (inversely rather). The big problems then were > that most of the > characters were rather complex and that (more or less consequently) > cursive forms did not come naturally. I remember someone saying that they > could not code many of the characters into the printers of the time (24 pin > dot matrix?). None would have been an A+ then, but maybe some of this gives > some direction (but note that I personally, having gotten used to Latin > alphabet skimming, don't see the point of changing anyhow). > > --- Original Message -- > From: LakMeer Kravid <lakmeerkravid@gmail.com> > To: lojban-list@lojban.org > Sent: Sunday, April 6, 2008 9:54:28 AM > Subject: lojban Re: Original orthography draft now online for critique > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:40 AM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > I'd say somewhere a bit above the middle of the range of proposals (a B > of some sort — roughly on a par with the Latin alphabet). Having to go > back to dot the 'i's is a defect as is the fact that the use of diacritics > for phoneme distinction increases the likelihood of misspellings and/or > misreadings. That aside. the various symbols are fairly distinct, though > perhaps unduly complex. It is unclear whether in a running hand the > difference between a loop and a point will be maintained. > Thanks for your critique, you raise some valid points. The 'i-dotting' > mechanism is I feel, the weakest part of my proposal. I haven't found > a better mechanism yet, and I am fond of the diacritics so for now it > is unchanged. The distinction between round and point is something i > wasted many-a sheet of paper testing. I'm convinced it works. Some > characters are complex, but they still flow from the pen naturally, so > I don't consider it an issue. I'm intrigued to hear you give the > system a 'B' as you said - to which proposal would > you give an 'A'? Perhaps we can mingle the best points from both. > 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. > > > > > > > > > You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster > Total Access, No Cost. > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com > > > 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
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Jon Top Hat Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't like the 's' at all, it's too easy to miss that it's even there. Addessed in v2, to be uploaded later today. It is now a wavey thing, resembling one period of a sine wave. This leaves the 'blank line' character available, which could be handy. > I don't like p/b, ... I feel that the character ... without the top loop would be better. > I'd like a less convoluted f/v, as well, but it's no big deal to me. Noted. > I like the idea of pre/post stops, but there's the difficulty of things like > {la .djan.djonz.}: would the internal '.' be pre- or post-? I imagined it as a post. A {.} is a {.} in Lojban, but purely from a stylistic angle, I think if you're writing a {.} after some empty space, use the pre, all others use the post. I'll use your name as an example when I write up the copy for version 2 so you can see it Thanks for your input. mu'o mi'e lakmir. 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.
Posted by Eppcott on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 4740 LakMeer, This is really great. For years I've tried to design a Lojban orthography around the principle yours embodies, but never succeeded in getting it to work. If you've done so, then I congratulate you. It looks beautiful. -Eppcott On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 8:01 PM, LakMeer Kravid <lakmeerkravid@gmail.com> wrote: > My first draft has been uploaded to > http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Original%20lojban%20orthography > Please comment and make suggestions, I'm open to drastic reformations. > I'm also looking for a name for it. > 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. > > 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.
Posted by PierreAbbat on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 324 On Sunday 06 April 2008 13:44, Marjorie Scherf wrote: > I don't actually speak Farsi, but one of my friends from high school does, > and she was showing me one time how to write the letters. (The standard, at > least in Iran, is to use Arabic script.) I don't actually remember the > letters, but I do remember that there are dots that differentiate some of > the letters (which in informal handwriting, two dots above can be replaced > with a line, and three dots above can be replaced with a circle) and that > they are put in after the word is written. So those two "issues" are no > worse than a common orthography for a common language. (And if the Arabic > language uses the same features in it's orthography, which I would expect > unless hearing otherwise, one of the word-ancestors of lojban.) Also, Farsi > doesn't even use any letters for half their vowels, so this is actually > clearer. Yes, Arabic does use the same features in its script. The Persian alphabet is the Arabic alphabet plus four letters: pa, which is ba with three dots below instead of one; che, which is jim with three dots below instead of one; ge, which is kaf with the upper stroke doubled; and zha, which is zay with three dots instead of one. (I'm not sure of the letter names.) And IIRR, sin is sometimes written as a straight line with no dots. Pierre 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.
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 Thanks for the kind words, Matt. Lets see how we get on: Version 2 is now online: http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Lakmir.%27s+Orthography+v2 Several improvements have been made for readability and clarity, all changed are detailed on the wiki. Unfortunately I feel it has become distinctly uglier, which is disappointing since I worked hard to make it pretty, and I seem to have somehow ruined it. I think it might be the kerning. Hopefully we can converge on usability AND aesthetic for version 3, which should be reasonably final. Thanks for everyone's input so far, and thanks to the chat room guys for all the help the other day. ki'e 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.
Posted by florolf on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 10 LakMeer Kravid wrote: > Version 2 is now online: > http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Lakmir.%27s+Orthography+v2 Yippie. Just a few quick remarks since i have to leave in a couple of minutes: - Y and S are very similar now - I like the R - EN *could* become M - the ' somehow brakes the "flow" of a word, although I'm not yet sure whether this is a good or a bad thing. I have to agree that the sample looks less.. round. Especially the new L stands out, although that might be good since it might help in recognizing gadri. I'll think about all of this in greater detail when I get back. mu'omi'e florolf 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.
Posted by eyeonus on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 86 I preferred the old l/r and n/m accenting thing, although I do prefer the new l to the old one. As a side note, the new 'r' looks almost /exactly/ the same as Japanese hiragana 'ka'. The new 's' isn't much better than the old, IMHO. I'm including a mouse-drawn .bmp of what I was thinking of when I gave my suggestion on changing the 's'. I much, much, much prefer the original .y'ybu. to the rev.2 one, I still have the same problem with f/v and p/b, seeing as how they haven't been changed. I suggest keeping m/n as they were in rev.1, keeping l/r as they were in rev.1 but using the rev.2 'l', keeping the rev.1 .y'ybu., and think about something for p/b and f/v. As an aside, the main reason I prefer the old l/r and m/n is because, personally, I could care less about the phontactic reasons for accent and whatnot, there's less new symbols to remember with them then without. (Okay, so it's only two more, sue me. I have a bad enough memory to feel justified in not wanting to need to learn even one more symbol than absolutely neccessary. Heck, I'd be happier if every symbol had an accent match, and on that note I semi-jokingly suggest the following non-accent/accent pairs: a/o, e/i, y/u, p/b, f/v, k/g, t/d, l/r, m/n, s/z, c/j, '/x. Only12 characters to remember! W00t!) On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Florian Larysch <florolf@devbraindump.de> wrote: > LakMeer Kravid wrote: > > > Version 2 is now online: > > > > http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Lakmir.%27s+Orthography+v2 > > > Yippie. > > Just a few quick remarks since i have to leave in a couple of minutes: > - Y and S are very similar now > - I like the R > - EN *could* become M > - the ' somehow brakes the "flow" of a word, although I'm not yet sure > whether this is a good or a bad thing. > > I have to agree that the sample looks less.. round. Especially the new L > stands out, although that might be good since it might help in recognizing > gadri. > > I'll think about all of this in greater detail when I get back. > > mu'omi'e florolf > > > > 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
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Jon Top Hat Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote: > I preferred the old l/r and n/m accenting thing, although I do prefer the > new l to the old one. I essentially agree with you here, I might reinstate the arbitrary grouping i had before. > The new 's' isn't much better than the old, IMHO. I'm including a > mouse-drawn .bmp of what I was thinking of when I gave my suggestion on > changing the 's'. I do think the S is one of the chief culprits in the making rev2 less pretty to look at. Making something simple and unobtrusive (because I somehow have this idea that thats how 's' should be) proves very difficult while still keeping the pen flow natural. For example, your 'half-height hump' character that you suggested, breaks the pen flow. If one flips it horizontally (mirrors it) it no longer breaks the flow, but it looks very similar to .ebu. > I much, much, much prefer the original .y'ybu. to the rev.2 one, Noted. > As an aside ... I could care less about the phontactic reasons for accent and > whatnot, there's less new symbols to remember with them then without. Also a perfectly valid point, and one I was considering myself when working on rev2. I feel that some steps backwards are probably in order. > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Florian Larysch <florolf@devbraindump.de> > > Yippie. > > - EN *could* become M Oh yeah. Damn. > > - the ' somehow brakes the "flow" of a word, although I'm not yet sure > whether this is a good or a bad thing. I'd say it fits with the idea of .y'y, but may not be the most fun to write > > the new L stands out, although that might be good since it might help in recognizing > gadri. Thanks for your comments guys. Lak 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.
Posted by eyeonus on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 86 On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 7:35 PM, LakMeer Kravid <lakmeerkravid@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Jon Top Hat Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> > wrote: > > The new 's' isn't much better than the old, IMHO. I'm including a > > mouse-drawn .bmp of what I was thinking of when I gave my suggestion on > > changing the 's'. > I do think the S is one of the chief culprits in the making rev2 less > pretty to look at. Making something simple and unobtrusive (because I > somehow have this idea that thats how 's' should be) proves very > difficult while still keeping the pen flow natural. > For example, your 'half-height hump' character that you suggested, > breaks the pen flow. If one flips it horizontally (mirrors it) it no > longer breaks the flow, but it looks very similar to .ebu. > > Okay, I have a solution with which you can use my 's' idea, reversed as you say, and not have to worry about .ebu. similarity. Ready? Here it is: a = current .abu o = current .abu. with (not actually) a fricative stroke (hereafter accent). e = current .ibu. i = current .ibu. with accent y = current .ybu. u = current .ybu. with accent s = reversed "half-height hump" c,z,j = as s, with appropriate accent and slash marks. r = rev2 ly. with accent m = rev.1 my. n = rev.1 ny. p/b = rev.2 py./by. without top loop All else as in rev.2. (This also frees up p/b to not have that top loop- which as you can probably tell I'm really pushing for- and also not be confusable (<-word?) with any of the vowels. The f/v I can live with... if I have to.) (Also, I just noticed that ny. in rev.1 (my. in rev.2) looks remarkably like cursive, lower-case 'z'.) .... Also, have you thought about characters for the selma'o PA1, PA2, and PA3? It's obviously not terribly important or neccessary, as we could spell it out or use the roman characters like we do now, but it's a point of curiousity on my part. (ex. {34.65 lo ronru'u cu jdima lo patxu} = {civopixamu lo ronru'u cu jdima lo patxu} ~= "A pot sells for 34.65 Euros.") -- mu'o mi'e .topy'at. .i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu
Posted by Anonymous on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT _ From: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org mailto:lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org On Behalf Of Jon "Top Hat" Jones Sent: Monday, 07 April, 2008 16:24 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: lojban Re: Original orthography draft now online for critique snip and on that note I semi-jokingly suggest the following non-accent/accent pairs: a/o, e/i, y/u, p/b, f/v, k/g, t/d, l/r, m/n, s/z, c/j, '/x. Only12 characters to remember! W00t!) If we pair the vowels, might I suggest the pairs be e/i, o/u, and a/y? Then we'd have front vowels, back vowels, and central vowels together. On the other hand, an orthography can be just as arbitrary as it likes, so long as it is clear and consistent. mu'omi'e skaryzgik.
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 Wow, a detailed response with some excellent suggestions. Rev3 is going to be pretty drastic, we may need a rev4. I had the idea last night of modifying all the characters which take a flick so that they have a line break in them, that way you can use the line break to write the flick without having to go back and mark them when you're finished the word. I also have some other ideas which will need diagrams, I'll make some doodles on jbotcan tonight (NZ time) and see what myself and whoever is in #lojban can come up with. And yes, I have thought about glyphs for PA*, in the way that I thought about having them, but havent actually designed any glyphs. Suggestions welcome. I had the idea at the time that they'd be noncursive so they'd really stand out, but that may be my glibau prejudices creeping in. Again, thanks for the detailed analysis .topy'at., I continue to really appreciate, as ever, the input of lojbanists for my little project .io.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.
Posted by Lakmir. on Mon 16 of Jun, 2008 06:01 GMT posts: 21 http://jbotcan.org/res/261.html Quick ideas of intentionally broken letters, so that you don't have to backtrack to put marks on them. Also an idea for a broken S, evolved from Jon's mirrored-half-height-hump Lak 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.
