{la .alis.} book

[Remo Dentato]

Quite some time ago there was a long thread with a guy wanting to publish {la .alis}.

Did he publish it in the end? I would have said yes, but I can't find any reference to the book.

Anyone have more info?

mu'o mi'e la .remod.

[Pierre Abbat]

Are you talking about Michael Everson? He has a collection of translations of
Alice.

Pierre
--
gau do li'i co'e kei do

[Remo Dentato]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Pierre Abbat <ph...@bezitopo.org> wrote:

On Sunday, February 24, 2013 09:54:43 Remo Dentato wrote:
> Quite some time ago there was a long thread with a guy wanting to publish
> {la .alis}.

Are you talking about Michael Everson? He has a collection of translations of
Alice.

I guess so, thanks.  Unfortunately I can't see a Lojban version on his site. Most probably he was put off by the long discussion on typesetting convention for Lojban.He might have decided not to move forward.

remod

[james riley]

OTOH, relatively trivial to self-publish at lulu or similar these
days. I took the pdf to the uni printers, and after some funny looks,
got a bound version.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "lojban" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

[Remo Dentato]

Yep, I've done something similar for "lo nu binxo" but I had to typeset the text and create the 6"x9" pdf (which I made available on the wiki) to send to Lulu.

Sadly "la .alis." is much more complex to typeset, even if I start doing myself, I doubt I will ever compete it: too much time needed.

 I really can't stand reading from the wiki page, even if, in the case of "la .alis." a lot of effort have been spent to make it nicer to the eye. A printed book would have been nice.

remod.

[Michael Everson]

Hello, everyone. I am back.

> On 24 Feb 2013, at 10:29, Remo Dentato <rden...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Pierre Abbat <ph...@bezitopo.org> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, February 24, 2013 09:54:43 Remo Dentato wrote:

>>> Quite some time ago there was a long thread with a guy wanʒting to publish {la .alis}.

>>
>> Are you talking about Michael Everson? He has a collection of translations of Alice.
>

> I guess so, thanks. Unfortunately I can't see a Lojban version on his site. Most probably he was put off by the long discussion on typesetting convention for Lojban. He might have decided not to move forward.

This is the 150th anniversary of the publication of Alice and I’d like to move forward with the project. To do that, I’d like to ask if anyone would like to volunteer to work with me.

The goal is to experiment slightly, producing an Alice with “Victorian” typographic principles. Proper names will be written with capital letters. Stressed vowels (rare in that text) will have the acute accent. Guillemets will go along with particles to indicate citation. Full stops will be moved from the beginning of sentences (marked with capital letters) to the end.

I need someone to help me deal with questions concerning nested quotation, and narrative structure where the narrator interjects into a quotation. The particle “sei" starts a metalinguistic discourse; what ends one?

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

[selpa'i]

la'o me. Michael Everson .me cusku di'e

> Hello, everyone. I am back.
>

> This is the 150th anniversary of the publication of Alice and I’d
> like to move forward with the project. To do that, I’d like to ask if
> anyone would like to volunteer to work with me.
>
> The goal is to experiment slightly, producing an Alice with
> “Victorian” typographic principles. Proper names will be written with
> capital letters. Stressed vowels (rare in that text) will have the
> acute accent. Guillemets will go along with particles to indicate
> citation. Full stops will be moved from the beginning of sentences
> (marked with capital letters) to the end.

A bunch of people have experimented with this kind of typography. But
how do you intend to handle the first letter of each sentence? In
Lojban, pretty much every sentence begins with {.i}, so capitalizing the
"i" looks weird, but capitalizing the next word instead also does.

> I need someone to help me deal with questions concerning nested
> quotation, and narrative structure where the narrator interjects into
> a quotation. The particle “sei" starts a metalinguistic discourse;
> what ends one?

In both Alice and Oz, {sei}-clauses are always enclosed in em-dashes.
For some reason the online version of Alice at http://alis.lojban.org/
doesn't render the em-dashes, but they are there.

Oz uses the same style (http://selpahi.de/oz_plain.html), e.g. search
for this passage to see it all come together:

ni'o «lu lo vilcarbi'e ti muvdu doi .em. —sei xy fi lo speni cu cladu
cusku— .i mi ba kurji lo danlu li'u» .i ba bo bajra fa'a lo ta'ozda noi
lo bakni jo'u lo xirma cu se setca fi ke'a

I recall you being against that placement of « with respect to {lu}, is
that correct?

mi'e la selpa'i mu'o

[Michael Everson]

On 26 May 2015, at 21:00, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:

> A bunch of people have experimented with this kind of typography. But how do you intend to handle the first letter of each sentence? In Lojban, pretty much every sentence begins with {.i}, so capitalizing the "i" looks weird, but capitalizing the next word instead also does.

I’ll capitalize the first word of each sentence, even if it is “I”.

>> I need someone to help me deal with questions concerning nested
>> quotation, and narrative structure where the narrator interjects into
>> a quotation. The particle “sei" starts a metalinguistic discourse;
>> what ends one?
>
> In both Alice and Oz, {sei}-clauses are always enclosed in em-dashes. For some reason the online version of Alice at http://alis.lojban.org/ doesn't render the em-dashes, but they are there.

What ends a sei-clause? Or, what ends a sei-clause when the interpolation comes in the middle of one sentence? “Give me,” John said, “a reason to go home."

> Oz uses the same style (http://selpahi.de/oz_plain.html), e.g. search for this passage to see it all come together:
>
> ni'o «lu lo vilcarbi'e ti muvdu doi .em. —sei xy fi lo speni cu cladu cusku— .i mi ba kurji lo danlu li'u» .i ba bo bajra fa'a lo ta'ozda noi lo bakni jo'u lo xirma cu se setca fi ke’a

Most of the closing em-dashes in Oz precede .i or precede li’u.. but here

Ni’o lu «Uo —sei la Alis cu pensi— mi ba lo nu farlu tai ti cu ba na xanka lo nu farlu fo lo serti.

“Well!” thought Alice to herself. “After such a fall as this, I shall think nothing of tumbling down-stairs!

What’s; happening here? Is the position of a closing em-dash predictable?

> I recall you being against that placement of « with respect to {lu}, is that correct?

Yes, because in performance, it seems to me that “lu/li’u” would be in the voice of the narrator, while what is between the quotation marks would be in the voice of the character.

[Jorge Llambías]

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com> wrote:

What ends a sei-clause? Or, what ends a sei-clause when the interpolation comes in the middle of one sentence? “Give me,” John said, “a reason to go home."

The terminator for "sei" is "se'u", but it is very often elidible.

 

 Is the position of a closing em-dash predictable?

Yes, but you need to parse the sentence. The most common case is right after a selbri, usually "cusku":  --sei X cusku--

mu'o mi'e xorxes

 

[Michael Everson]

On 26 May 2015, at 22:57, Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com> wrote:
>
> What ends a sei-clause? Or, what ends a sei-clause when the interpolation comes in the middle of one sentence? “Give me,” John said, “a reason to go home."
>
> The terminator for "sei" is "se'u", but it is very often elidible.

Well, it’s YOUR language, guys, but that pretty much defeats the predictability of the system. If you have sei/se’u alongside lu/li’u, why can on be elided but the other not?

Some sort of normal typography would yield:

Ni’o lu «Uo,» sei la Alis cu pensi «mi ba lo nu farlu tai ti cu ba na xanka lo nu farlu fo lo serti» li'u.

> Is the position of a closing em-dash predictable?
>
> Yes, but you need to parse the sentence.

Then it’s not predictable.

> The most common case is right after a selbri, usually "cusku": --sei X cusku—

I’ve seen that, yes.

[Jorge Llambías]

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com> wrote:

On 26 May 2015, at 22:57, Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The terminator for "sei" is "se'u", but it is very often elidible.

Well, it’s YOUR language, guys, but that pretty much defeats the predictability of the system. If you have sei/se’u alongside lu/li’u, why can on be elided but the other not?

"li'u" can be elided sometimes too, but less often. The reason is that the type of things that sei-se'u can bracket is much more restricted than the type of things lu-li'u can bracket.

 

>  Is the position of a closing em-dash predictable?
>
> Yes, but you need to parse the sentence.

Then it’s not predictable.

How does that folow? What do you mean by "predictable" then? Given any grammatical utterance, you can know without any ambiguity where the em-dash goes.

[Gleki Arxokuna]

2015-05-26 22:33 GMT+03:00 Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com>:

I need someone to help me deal with questions concerning nested quotation, and narrative structure where the narrator interjects into a quotation. The particle “sei" starts a metalinguistic discourse; what ends one?

In short, the selbri (main verb) itself closes it by the virtue of how its grammar works. You may see something similar for {lo} in {lo broda} and similar constructs that in 90% of cases doesn't need any terminators (markers of the end of constructs).

However, I'd prefer not nesting {sei}-clauses inside {lu ... li'u} quotes since otherwise if you do want to quote a {sei}-clause you are left with uglier ways of doing so.

Also since probably this project aims at selling books I'd prefer replacing all compound words (lujvo) not in the dictionary with their expanded forms to make the reading easier for people still not fluent in Lojban.

As for “Victorian” typographic principles those are IMO compatible with Lojban.

2015-05-26 22:33 GMT+03:00 Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com>:

This is the 150th anniversary of the publication of Alice and I’d like to move forward with the project. To do that, I’d like to ask if anyone would like to volunteer to work with me.

What other help needed? Personally I have in my ToDo updating the translation to make it easier to read by using less complex words and constructs. What is the deadline?

[And Rosta]

On 27 May 2015 10:07, "Gleki Arxokuna" <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Personally I have in my ToDo updating the translation to make it easier to read by using less complex words and constructs.

Replacing all other lujvo by zei lujvo would make it easier to discern the component parts but would make the text harder to read because of increasing verbosity and monotony.

To my mind, a reader coming across an unfamiliar lujvo should look it up in the dictionary, and shouldn't rely on guessing the meaning from the lujvo's derivational components.

--And.

[Gleki Arxokuna]

2015-05-27 12:56 GMT+03:00 And Rosta <and....@gmail.com>:

On 27 May 2015 10:07, "Gleki Arxokuna" <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Personally I have in my ToDo updating the translation to make it easier to read by using less complex words and constructs.

Replacing all other lujvo by zei lujvo would make it easier to discern the component parts but would make the text harder to read because of increasing verbosity and monotony.

I wouldn't use lujvo at all, see above.

 

To my mind, a reader coming across an unfamiliar lujvo should look it up in the dictionary, and shouldn't rely on guessing the meaning from the lujvo's derivational components.

But since some lujvo have never been used at all except in this translation and since no one was able to produce a working dictionary with lujvo this "should look it up in the dictionary" requirement is unrealistic (jbovlaste produces huge dictionary with thousands of words as well which imo wouldn't work as an appendix to "Alice").

--And.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Michael Everson]

On 27 May 2015, at 01:30, Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> The terminator for "sei" is "se'u", but it is very often elidible.
>>
>> Well, it’s YOUR language, guys, but that pretty much defeats the predictability of the system. If you have sei/se’u alongside lu/li’u, why can on be elided but the other not?
>
> "li'u" can be elided sometimes too, but less often. The reason is that the type of things that sei-se'u can bracket is much more restricted than the type of things lu-li'u can bracket.

“Can be elided sometimes”. What are the rules for choosing?

>>>> Is the position of a closing em-dash predictable?
>>>
>>> Yes, but you need to parse the sentence.
>>>
>> Then it’s not predictable.
>
> How does that folow? What do you mean by "predictable" then? Given any grammatical utterance, you can know without any ambiguity where the em-dash goes.

You can’t predict without knowing the language, unless you can tell me that every selbri (verb?) has a certain syllable structure and that no other words or particles in the language have that same structure.

I can predict where to add in guillemets because of the citation particles. Not so with sei/se’u if the latter is left off. And what is the rationale for leaving it off?

[Michael Everson]

On 27 May 2015, at 10:06, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is...@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

>> 2015-05-26 22:33 GMT+03:00 Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com>:
>> I need someone to help me deal with questions concerning nested quotation, and narrative structure where the narrator interjects into a quotation. The particle “sei" starts a metalinguistic discourse; what ends one?
>
> In short, the selbri (main verb) itself closes it by the virtue of how its grammar works. You may see something similar for {lo} in {lo broda} and similar constructs that in 90% of cases doesn't need any terminators (markers of the end of constructs).

A few years ago I pointed out that punctuating and capitalizing Lojban in the usual way did not change the language because it was just decorating the text in various ways; if read aloud there should be no difference. (Same as for writing Lojban in Tengwar.)

If the se’u were present, or if whatever followed the

> However, I'd prefer not nesting {sei}-clauses inside {lu ... li'u} quotes since otherwise if you do want to quote a {sei}-clause you are left with uglier ways of doing so.

"On this point,” said Michael, "I very much agree.”

"On this point, I very much agree,” said Michael.

I think given the structure a good translation for Lojban should avoid these kinds of breaks. Easier for performance (reading aloud with character and narrator voices), too.

> Also since probably this project aims at selling books I'd prefer replacing all compound words (lujvo) not in the dictionary with their expanded forms to make the reading easier for people still not fluent in Lojban.

One doubts that a Lojban Alice will sell as well as a Latin one. I can say I have often looked things up and not found them in the dictionary. Including very short particles. And in one of the dictionaries I have, “mi” is listed on its own at the end of all the words beginning in mi-. That was odd, or an error, I guess.

> As for “Victorian” typographic principles those are IMO compatible with Lojban.

Would you like to help with the project? Including possibly “regularizing” the text as suggested above? De-compounding compounds? Restoring balance in terms of “se’u”s?

[Gleki Arxokuna]

2015-05-27 14:02 GMT+03:00 Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com>:

On 27 May 2015, at 10:06, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is...@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

>> 2015-05-26 22:33 GMT+03:00 Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com>:
>> I need someone to help me deal with questions concerning nested quotation, and narrative structure where the narrator interjects into a quotation. The particle “sei" starts a metalinguistic discourse; what ends one?
>
> In short, the selbri (main verb) itself closes it by the virtue of how its grammar works. You may see something similar for {lo} in {lo broda} and similar constructs that in 90% of cases doesn't need any terminators (markers of the end of constructs).

A few years ago I pointed out that punctuating and capitalizing Lojban in the usual way did not change the language because it was just decorating the text in various ways; if read aloud there should be no difference. (Same as for writing Lojban in Tengwar.)

yes. If by punctuation you mean English-like punctuation like ".,!?<>" and not words. Modern parsers will accept this input.

If the se’u were present, or if whatever followed the

> However, I'd prefer not nesting {sei}-clauses inside {lu ... li'u} quotes since otherwise if you do want to quote a {sei}-clause you are left with uglier ways of doing so.

"On this point,” said Michael, "I very much agree.”

"On this point, I very much agree,” said Michael.

I think given the structure a good translation for Lojban should avoid these kinds of breaks. Easier for performance (reading aloud with character and narrator voices), too.

As you wish. With breaks it'd be

I fi la'e di'u - sei la Maikl pu cusku - mi so'i va'e tugni.

Without them 

I fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni, - sei la Maikl pu cusku.

This of course backwards on how English does since you mark "said Michael" whereas written English marks the rest and the spoken English probably will use intonation.

Although, some might prefer splitting {lu ... li'u} into two quotes tagged with FA. But I agree that split quotes in Lojban or English text might be hard to read for speakers of some languages.

Without split quotes but with {lu ... li'u} it'd be something like

I "lu fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni li'u" pu cusku fa la Maikl.

"On this point, I very much agree,” said Michael.

> Also since probably this project aims at selling books I'd prefer replacing all compound words (lujvo) not in the dictionary with their expanded forms to make the reading easier for people still not fluent in Lojban.

One doubts that a Lojban Alice will sell as well as a Latin one. I can say I have often looked things up and not found them in the dictionary. Including very short particles.

Which ones?

 

And in one of the dictionaries I have, “mi” is listed on its own at the end of all the words beginning in mi-. That was odd, or an error, I guess.

LaTeX sorting problems, most likely.

 

> As for “Victorian” typographic principles those are IMO compatible with Lojban.

Would you like to help with the project? Including possibly “regularizing” the text as suggested above? De-compounding compounds? Restoring balance in terms of “se’u”s?

Please, tell us til what time you accept offers to help. If at this time no one volunteers you may automatically assume that I (=la gleki) volunteer shifting the task in my ToDo list higher.

Also please inform us of the deadline when this task of adapting the text both in punctuation and style has to be done.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

[Michael Everson]

On 27 May 2015, at 12:25, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is...@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

>> A few years ago I pointed out that punctuating and capitalizing Lojban in the usual way did not change the language because it was just decorating the text in various ways; if read aloud there should be no difference. (Same as for writing Lojban in Tengwar.)
>
> yes. If by punctuation you mean English-like punctuation like ".,!?<>" and not words. Modern parsers will accept this input.

That’s what I mean.

> > However, I'd prefer not nesting {sei}-clauses inside {lu ... li'u} quotes since otherwise if you do want to quote a {sei}-clause you are left with uglier ways of doing so.
>
> "On this point,” said Michael, "I very much agree.”
>
> "On this point, I very much agree,” said Michael.
>
> I think given the structure a good translation for Lojban should avoid these kinds of breaks. Easier for performance (reading aloud with character and narrator voices), too.
>
> As you wish. With breaks it'd be
>
> I fi la'e di'u - sei la Maikl pu cusku - mi so'i va'e tugni.

So…

I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.

But the problem again here is that for consistency (and automation) one would expect:

I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku se'u, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.

Wouldn’t one?

> Without them
> I fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni, - sei la Maikl pu cusku.

So…

I lu “Fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni,” li'u sei la Maikl pu cusku [se’u].

Without punctuation between li’u and sei… And I still don’t understand the rationale for not closing the sei/se’u set.

> This of course backwards on how English does since you mark "said Michael" whereas written English marks the rest and the spoken English probably will use intonation.

Not entirely sure what you mean by “mark” here.

> Although, some might prefer splitting {lu ... li'u} into two quotes tagged with FA. But I agree that split quotes in Lojban or English text might be hard to read for speakers of some languages.
> Without split quotes but with {lu ... li'u} it'd be something like
> I "lu fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni li'u" pu cusku fa la Maikl.
> "On this point, I very much agree,” said Michael.

I would think lu/li’u would always be required.

>>> > Also since probably this project aims at selling books I'd prefer replacing all compound words (lujvo) not in the dictionary with their expanded forms to make the reading easier for people still not fluent in Lojban.
>>
>> One doubts that a Lojban Alice will sell as well as a Latin one. I can say I have often looked things up and not found them in the dictionary. Including very short particles.
>
> Which ones?

I don’t recall off-hand. Maybe it was a sorting error as you mention below.

>> And in one of the dictionaries I have, “mi” is listed on its own at the end of all the words beginning in mi-. That was odd, or an error, I guess.
>
> LaTeX sorting problems, most likely.
>
>>> > As for “Victorian” typographic principles those are IMO compatible with Lojban.
>>
>> Would you like to help with the project? Including possibly “regularizing” the text as suggested above? De-compounding compounds? Restoring balance in terms of “se’u”s?
>
> Please, tell us til what time you accept offers to help.

I’m interested in working with anyone interested in working on this with me. Soon is good.

> If at this time no one volunteers you may automatically assume that I (=la gleki) volunteer shifting the task in my ToDo list higher.

I think it would be fun working with you, and if as you say no one else is interested -- though other voices might be useful or interesting in the discussion @johncowan ;-) — it would be great if you could shift the task higher.

> Also please inform us of the deadline when this task of adapting the text both in punctuation and style has to be done.

As soon as it is done the book can be typeset and published. I suspect it might not take all that much time. But one would have to see.

[selpa'i]

la'o me. Michael Everson .me cusku di'e

> I think given the structure a good translation for Lojban should
> avoid these kinds of breaks. Easier for performance (reading aloud
> with character and narrator voices), too.

One question: If you care so much about making the text easier to read
aloud, why are you removing all the mandatory glottal stops (i.e. the
dots)? Without them, the narrator (performer) is likely to not pronounce
them at least for certain cmevla, because you first have to see the
entire word and make sure it ends in a consonant to know that you have
the pronounce the glottal stop (or pause) before the word (and after it,
but that's easier). I understand why you don't want to use dots to mark
the glottal stops, but maybe you could use another symbol.

[Michael Everson]

On 27 May 2015, at 14:36, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:

> One question: If you care so much about making the text easier to read aloud, why are you removing all the mandatory glottal stops (i.e. the dots)? Without them, the narrator (performer) is likely to not pronounce them at least for certain cmevla, because you first have to see the entire word and make sure it ends in a consonant to know that you have the pronounce the glottal stop (or pause) before the word (and after it, but that's easier). I understand why you don't want to use dots to mark the glottal stops, but maybe you could use another symbol.

Well, a glottal stop is a consonant, and a pause is a pause. “What is Lojban?" says:

The period is an optional reminder to the reader, representing a mandatory pause dictated by the rules of the language. Such pauses can be of any duration, and are part of the morphology, or word formation rules, and not the grammar.

In general this dot appears before letters which would be capitalized (sentence-initial .i) or surrounding loanwords (.dorotis.) which would be capitalized as well. I’d suggest that the capitalization would be enough of a reminder (and the reminder is described as “optional” anyway though the stop or pause is not).

[And Rosta]

Michael Everson, On 27/05/2015 14:56:

> On 27 May 2015, at 14:36, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> One question: If you care so much about making the text easier to read aloud, why are you removing all the mandatory glottal stops (i.e. the dots)? Without them, the narrator (performer) is likely to not pronounce them at least for certain cmevla, because you first have to see the entire word and make sure it ends in a consonant to know that you have the pronounce the glottal stop (or pause) before the word (and after it, but that's easier). I understand why you don't want to use dots to mark the glottal stops, but maybe you could use another symbol.
>
> Well, a glottal stop is a consonant, and a pause is a pause.

And both phonetically realize phoneme /./.

Michael Everson, On 27/05/2015 14:13:

> I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.
>
> But the problem again here is that for consistency (and automation) one would expect:
>
> I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku se'u, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.
>
> Wouldn’t one?

But why would one expect consistency with regard to a grammatical feature that is expressly variable? A rough analogy from English is the omissibility of _that_ from the start of complement clauses (e.g. "He knows (that) she is"): what lunatic would 'regularize' an English text by restoring every omitted _that_? And would you make overt *every* covert terminator?

--And.

[Gleki Arxokuna]

2015-05-27 16:13 GMT+03:00 Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com>:

On 27 May 2015, at 12:25, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is...@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

>> A few years ago I pointed out that punctuating and capitalizing Lojban in the usual way did not change the language because it was just decorating the text in various ways; if read aloud there should be no difference. (Same as for writing Lojban in Tengwar.)
>
> yes. If by punctuation you mean English-like punctuation like ".,!?<>" and not words. Modern parsers will accept this input.

That’s what I mean.

> > However, I'd prefer not nesting {sei}-clauses inside {lu ... li'u} quotes since otherwise if you do want to quote a {sei}-clause you are left with uglier ways of doing so.
>
> "On this point,” said Michael, "I very much agree.”
>
> "On this point, I very much agree,” said Michael.
>
> I think given the structure a good translation for Lojban should avoid these kinds of breaks. Easier for performance (reading aloud with character and narrator voices), too.
>
> As you wish. With breaks it'd be
>
> I fi la'e di'u - sei la Maikl pu cusku - mi so'i va'e tugni.

So…

I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.

But the problem again here is that for consistency (and automation) one would expect:

I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku se'u, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.

Wouldn’t one?

As you can see from the grammar it is not required there since {sei} clause is expected to be ended by its selbri, which is {pu cusku} here. So {se'u} is not required. Why so? Because this is how {sei} is defined.

If you need technical details then here they are:

free <- SEI-clause (terms CU-clause?)? selbri SEhU-clause?

[ http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Shortened_PEG_grammar_of_Lojban ]

I don't know what you mean by consistency or automation. With or without {se'u} both sentences mean the same. But why explicitly adding {se'u} if it doesn't change the meaning?

 

> Without them
> I fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni, - sei la Maikl pu cusku.

So…

I lu “Fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni,” li'u sei la Maikl pu cusku [se’u].

Without punctuation between li’u and sei… And I still don’t understand the rationale for not closing the sei/se’u set.

To save two syllables. Actually if for stylistic spurposes we bane all split quotes then there is not need for {sei}.

It will be just 

I lu “Fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni,” li'u pu se cusku la Maikl = " ... " was said by Michael.

or

I fe lu “Fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni,” li'u pu cusku fa la Maikl = " ... " said Michael.

 

> This of course backwards on how English does since you mark "said Michael" whereas written English marks the rest and the spoken English probably will use intonation.

Not entirely sure what you mean by “mark” here.

Quotations marks mark the borders of the quote like what is done in Lojban by {lu ... li'u}

 

> Although, some might prefer splitting {lu ... li'u} into two quotes tagged with FA. But I agree that split quotes in Lojban or English text might be hard to read for speakers of some languages.
> Without split quotes but with {lu ... li'u} it'd be something like
> I "lu fi la'e di'u mi so'i va'e tugni li'u" pu cusku fa la Maikl.
> "On this point, I very much agree,” said Michael.

I would think lu/li’u would always be required.

Depends on style but in this case I'd always use it, yes.

>>> > Also since probably this project aims at selling books I'd prefer replacing all compound words (lujvo) not in the dictionary with their expanded forms to make the reading easier for people still not fluent in Lojban.
>>
>> One doubts that a Lojban Alice will sell as well as a Latin one. I can say I have often looked things up and not found them in the dictionary. Including very short particles.
>
> Which ones?

I don’t recall off-hand. Maybe it was a sorting error as you mention below.

>> And in one of the dictionaries I have, “mi” is listed on its own at the end of all the words beginning in mi-. That was odd, or an error, I guess.
>
> LaTeX sorting problems, most likely.
>
>>> > As for “Victorian” typographic principles those are IMO compatible with Lojban.
>>
>> Would you like to help with the project? Including possibly “regularizing” the text as suggested above? De-compounding compounds? Restoring balance in terms of “se’u”s?
>
> Please, tell us til what time you accept offers to help.

I’m interested in working with anyone interested in working on this with me. Soon is good.

> If at this time no one volunteers you may automatically assume that I (=la gleki) volunteer shifting the task in my ToDo list higher.

I think it would be fun working with you, and if as you say no one else is interested -- though other voices might be useful or interesting in the discussion @johncowan ;-) — it would be great if you could shift the task higher.

> Also please inform us of the deadline when this task of adapting the text both in punctuation and style has to be done.

As soon as it is done the book can be typeset and published. I suspect it might not take all that much time. But one would have to see.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

[Michael Everson]

On 27 May 2015, at 16:42, And Rosta <and....@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Well, a glottal stop is a consonant, and a pause is a pause.
>
> And both phonetically realize phoneme /./.

A pause of indeterminate length is a phoneme?

>> I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.
>>
>> But the problem again here is that for consistency (and automation) one would expect:
>>
>> I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku se'u, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.
>>
>> Wouldn’t one?
>
> But why would one expect consistency with regard to a grammatical feature that is expressly variable?

Because Lojban is hard enough and there are no native speakers?

> A rough analogy from English is the omissibility of _that_ from the start of complement clauses (e.g. "He knows (that) she is"): what lunatic would 'regularize' an English text by restoring every omitted _that_? And would you make overt *every* covert terminator?

It seems to me that a relative pronoun is different from a state process. If lu/li’u is regular, why shouldn’t sei/se’u be?

As I say, it’s your language, but this seems quite inconsistent given the logicalness one might expect.

[Gleki Arxokuna]

2015-05-27 20:00 GMT+03:00 Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com>:

On 27 May 2015, at 16:42, And Rosta <and....@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Well, a glottal stop is a consonant, and a pause is a pause.
>
> And both phonetically realize phoneme /./.

A pause of indeterminate length is a phoneme?

>> I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.
>>
>> But the problem again here is that for consistency (and automation) one would expect:
>>
>> I lu “Fi la’e di’u,” sei la Maikl pu cusku se'u, “mi so’i va’e tugni” li’u.
>>
>> Wouldn’t one?
>
> But why would one expect consistency with regard to a grammatical feature that is expressly variable?

Because Lojban is hard enough and there are no native speakers?

> A rough analogy from English is the omissibility of _that_ from the start of complement clauses (e.g. "He knows (that) she is"): what lunatic would 'regularize' an English text by restoring every omitted _that_? And would you make overt *every* covert terminator?

It seems to me that a relative pronoun is different from a state process. If lu/li’u is regular, why shouldn’t sei/se’u be?

sei ... se'u is regular. It just has different rules compared to how bridi works.

bridi can have after selbri a tail with sumti, in {sei} and {lo} one needs to use {be} after selbri for that.

As I say, it’s your language, but this seems quite inconsistent given the logicalness one might expect.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

[And Rosta]

Michael Everson, On 27/05/2015 18:00:

> On 27 May 2015, at 16:42, And Rosta <and....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Well, a glottal stop is a consonant, and a pause is a pause.
>>
>> And both phonetically realize phoneme /./.
>
> A pause of indeterminate length is a phoneme?

A pause of indeterminate length is phonetic realization of a phoneme.

>> But why would one expect consistency with regard to a grammatical feature that is expressly variable?
>
> Because Lojban is hard enough and there are no native speakers?

Lojban's design is not at all optimized to make life easy for its learners or speakers. Its users could adopt conventions that eschew many elements of its design, in order to make life easier for its users, but that requires a consensus in usage and entails a de facto repudiation of those many elements eschewed.

>> A rough analogy from English is the omissibility of _that_ from the start of complement clauses (e.g. "He knows (that) she is"): what lunatic would 'regularize' an English text by restoring every omitted _that_? And would you make overt *every* covert terminator?
>
> It seems to me that a relative pronoun is different from a state
> process.

That _that_ isn't a relative pronoun. I don't understand what a 'state process' is. Like Lojban's terminators, clausal ('subordinating conjunction', 'complementizer') _that_ is usually but not always omissible without affecting sentence meaning.

(With regard to the _that_ that introduces relative clauses, the case for analysing bare relatives as containing a null _that_ is more complicated and hence perhaps weaker than the case for analysing bare complement clauses as containing a null _that_.)

>If lu/li’u is regular, why shouldn’t sei/se’u be?

sei/se'u is regular; it just is regular according to rules less simple than you would prefer.

--And.

[Michael Everson]

On 27 May 2015, at 18:49, And Rosta <and....@gmail.com> wrote:

>> A pause of indeterminate length is a phoneme?
>
> A pause of indeterminate length is phonetic realization of a phoneme.

As you wish. I love oddball linguistics. :-)

> Lojban's design is not at all optimized to make life easy for its learners or speakers. Its users could adopt conventions that eschew many elements of its design, in order to make life easier for its users, but that requires a consensus in usage and entails a de facto repudiation of those many elements eschewed.

Logical referents but semilogical structure? Okay.

>>> A rough analogy from English is the omissibility of _that_ from the start of complement clauses (e.g. "He knows (that) she is"): what lunatic would 'regularize' an English text by restoring every omitted _that_? And would you make overt *every* covert terminator?
>>

>> It seems to me that a [conjunction] is different from a state process.

>
> I don't understand what a 'state process' is. Like Lojban's terminators, clausal ('subordinating conjunction', 'complementizer') _that_ is usually but not always omissible without affecting sentence meaning.

Well, there’s a particle to start a paragraph (terminated by the next particle of the same kind), and one to start a sentence (terminated by the next particle of the same kind), and one to begin and end a citation (both particles used), and one to begin and end a metalingusitic interpolation (but the terminator is optional because you can use non-structural information to know when it terminates).

> (With regard to the _that_ that introduces relative clauses, the case for analysing bare relatives as containing a null _that_ is more complicated and hence perhaps weaker than the case for analysing bare complement clauses as containing a null _that_.)

I don’t see that as analogous, really.

>> If lu/li’u is regular, why shouldn’t sei/se’u be?
>
> sei/se'u is regular; it just is regular according to rules less simple than you would prefer.

Well, it does make it impossible to apply punctuation automatically, since the only way that one could do so is to have a script that would parse a variable-lengths string following “sei” to find the word of the selbri class. Not that the application of punctuation is a goal of Lojban.

[Jorge Llambías]

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com> wrote:

Well, it does make it impossible to apply punctuation automatically, since the only way that one could do so is to have a script that would parse a variable-lengths string following “sei” to find the word of the selbri class. Not that the application of punctuation is a goal of Lojban.

Strictly speaking, you can't do that with "lu" and "li'u" either. For example, in "zo lu .e zo li'u valsi", "lu" and "li'u" are not quoting anything, so an automatic punctuator that didn't know how to parse the sentence would get it wrong. Admittedly you probably won't find many such cases in practice.

[And Rosta]

On 28 May 2015 23:06, "Michael Everson" <eve...@evertype.com> wrote:
>
> On 27 May 2015, at 18:49, And Rosta <and....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> A pause of indeterminate length is a phoneme?
> >
> > A pause of indeterminate length is phonetic realization of a phoneme.
>
> As you wish. I love oddball linguistics. :-)

It's hardly as I wish; I think it's moronic. Almost all of the language is other than I would wish it to be.

> > sei/se'u is regular; it just is regular according to rules less simple than you would prefer.
>
> Well, it does make it impossible to apply punctuation automatically, since the only way that one could do so is to have a script that would parse a variable-lengths string following “sei” to find the word of the selbri class. Not that the application of punctuation is a goal of Lojban.

Indeed. Your project is somewhat quixotic.

I wish Lojban did less violence to prevailing typographical and orthographical conventions. I hate that sodding apostrophe, that makes the written language so instantly recognizable. But it is what it is, and if it were what I wish it were, it would be an utterly different language.

--And.

[Gleki Arxokuna]

2015-05-29 1:05 GMT+03:00 Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com>:

On 27 May 2015, at 18:49, And Rosta <and....@gmail.com> wrote:

>> A pause of indeterminate length is a phoneme?
>
> A pause of indeterminate length is phonetic realization of a phoneme.

As you wish. I love oddball linguistics. :-)

> Lojban's design is not at all optimized to make life easy for its learners or speakers. Its users could adopt conventions that eschew many elements of its design, in order to make life easier for its users, but that requires a consensus in usage and entails a de facto repudiation of those many elements eschewed.

Logical referents but semilogical structure? Okay.

In what way  is it semi-logical? What is logical for you?

Lojban is logical mostly in a sense that it is easily parsable.

{sei} and bridi tails have different grammar. The selbri itself terminates {sei}-clause, thus the end of {sei}-clause is 100%-predictable. When the selbri is encountered it's the signal that {sei}-clause just ended.

>>> A rough analogy from English is the omissibility of _that_ from the start of complement clauses (e.g. "He knows (that) she is"): what lunatic would 'regularize' an English text by restoring every omitted _that_? And would you make overt *every* covert terminator?
>>
>> It seems to me that a [conjunction] is different from a state process.
>
> I don't understand what a 'state process' is. Like Lojban's terminators, clausal ('subordinating conjunction', 'complementizer') _that_ is usually but not always omissible without affecting sentence meaning.

Well, there’s a particle to start a paragraph (terminated by the next particle of the same kind), and one to start a sentence (terminated by the next particle of the same kind), and one to begin and end a citation (both particles used), and one to begin and end a metalingusitic interpolation (but the terminator is optional because you can use non-structural information to know when it terminates).

> (With regard to the _that_ that introduces relative clauses, the case for analysing bare relatives as containing a null _that_ is more complicated and hence perhaps weaker than the case for analysing bare complement clauses as containing a null _that_.)

I don’t see that as analogous, really.

>> If lu/li’u is regular, why shouldn’t sei/se’u be?
>
> sei/se'u is regular; it just is regular according to rules less simple than you would prefer.

Well, it does make it impossible to apply punctuation automatically, since the only way that one could do so is to have a script that would parse a variable-lengths string following “sei” to find the word of the selbri class. Not that the application of punctuation is a goal of Lojban.

I see,  so you want to put European-like punctuation at the end of {sei}-clauses. This is certainly possible. Are you planning to publish any other books apart from Alice? If yes, then it's a matter of several patches to existing parsers to output such punctuation. Instead of " SEhU-clause?" we'll just have " (SEhU-clause / { ' – ' } ) ".

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

[Michael Everson]

On 28 May 2015, at 23:18, Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Well, it does make it impossible to apply punctuation automatically, since the only way that one could do so is to have a script that would parse a variable-lengths string following “sei” to find the word of the selbri class. Not that the application of punctuation is a goal of Lojban.
>
> Strictly speaking, you can't do that with "lu" and "li'u" either. For example, in "zo lu .e zo li'u valsi”,

Which means what? I don’t read Lojban. (I don’t read Zulu either, but I published “U-Alice Ezweni Lezimanga”.)

As far as I can tell you’ve written “‘e’” or something like that.

> "lu" and "li'u" are not quoting anything, so an automatic punctuator that didn't know how to parse the sentence would get it wrong. Admittedly you probably won't find many such cases in practice.

[Michael Everson]

On 29 May 2015, at 01:09, And Rosta <and....@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>> A pause of indeterminate length is a phoneme?
>>>>
>>> A pause of indeterminate length is phonetic realization of a phoneme.
>>>
>> As you wish. I love oddball linguistics. :-)
>>
> It's hardly as I wish; I think it's moronic. Almost all of the language is other than I would wish it to be.

OK; I don’t know who is happy or unhappy with Lojban. I’m trying to edge towards a particular publication. It appears Gleki is the one who is willing to help me push through.

>>> sei/se'u is regular; it just is regular according to rules less simple than you would prefer.
>>
>> Well, it does make it impossible to apply punctuation automatically, since the only way that one could do so is to have a script that would parse a variable-lengths string following “sei” to find the word of the selbri class. Not that the application of punctuation is a goal of Lojban.
>
> Indeed. Your project is somewhat quixotic.

Idealistic and impractical? I don’t know. I think it will make a Lojban look like a language, not like a wall of words.

> I wish Lojban did less violence to prevailing typographical and orthographical conventions. I hate that sodding apostrophe, that makes the written language so instantly recognizable. But it is what it is, and if it were what I wish it were, it would be an utterly different language.

Lojban is Lojban whether it is written with its current conventions, or in Tengwar, or in my Victorian conventions, or not written at all but only spoken. The same sorts of things can be said about English or Quenya or Chinese.

Would Polynesian languages be better off without the glottal stop? Maybe. In my editions I make sure that the fonts treat the glottal as larger and more distinct than the regular quotation marks. Looks a lot better.

[Michael Everson]

On 29 May 2015, at 08:00, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is...@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

>>> Lojban's design is not at all optimized to make life easy for its learners or speakers. Its users could adopt conventions that eschew many elements of its design, in order to make life easier for its users, but that requires a consensus in usage and entails a de facto repudiation of those many elements eschewed.
>>
>> Logical referents but semilogical structure? Okay.
>
> In what way is it semi-logical? What is logical for you?
> Lojban is logical mostly in a sense that it is easily parsable.

I guess I thought of lu/li’u and sei/se’u like opening and closing parentheses and having open parentheses in the language for both of those pairs but mandatory closing parentheses only for one of them doesn’t seem consistent.

> {sei} and bridi tails have different grammar. The selbri itself terminates {sei}-clause, thus the end of {sei}-clause is 100%-predictable. When the selbri is encountered it's the signal that {sei}-clause just ended.

Only if you know what a selbri is (or whether or not a given word is a selbri). And that means knowledge of the language, unless selbris are identifiable by their syllable structure or something. If not, then external knowledge must be there to identify the members of a class called selbri.

By the way as a linguist I find Lojban to be completely opaque in not using words like verb or noun or adjective.

At the same time, the argument/predicate thing (and the sentence tree) makes no sense to me at all, and just reminds me of the horror of generative grammar. :-O

But, Gleki, if you want to work with me on this I think it would be fun, and wouldn’t take so much time perhaps.

> > sei/se'u is regular; it just is regular according to rules less simple than you would prefer.
>
> Well, it does make it impossible to apply punctuation automatically, since the only way that one could do so is to have a script that would parse a variable-lengths string following “sei” to find the word of the selbri class. Not that the application of punctuation is a goal of Lojban.
>
> I see, so you want to put European-like punctuation at the end of {sei}-clauses. This is certainly possible. Are you planning to publish any other books apart from Alice?

Could do, if it is fun. :-)

> If yes, then it's a matter of several patches to existing parsers to output such punctuation. Instead of " SEhU-clause?" we'll just have " (SEhU-clause / { ' – ' } ) “.

So the parser can identify a selbri?

[Gleki Arxokuna]

2015-05-31 17:56 GMT+03:00 Michael Everson <eve...@evertype.com>:

On 29 May 2015, at 08:00, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is...@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

>>> Lojban's design is not at all optimized to make life easy for its learners or speakers. Its users could adopt conventions that eschew many elements of its design, in order to make life easier for its users, but that requires a consensus in usage and entails a de facto repudiation of those many elements eschewed.
>>
>> Logical referents but semilogical structure? Okay.
>
> In what way  is it semi-logical? What is logical for you?
> Lojban is logical mostly in a sense that it is easily parsable.

I guess I thought of lu/li’u and sei/se’u like opening and closing parentheses and having open parentheses in the language for both of those pairs but mandatory closing parentheses only for one of them doesn’t seem consistent.

> {sei} and bridi tails have different grammar. The selbri itself terminates {sei}-clause, thus the end of {sei}-clause is 100%-predictable. When the selbri is encountered it's the signal that {sei}-clause just ended.

Only if you know what a selbri is (or whether or not a given word is a selbri). And that means knowledge of the language, unless selbris are identifiable by their syllable structure or something.

Yes, sure. By their morphology and by knowledge of a limited set of particles that can work as selbri.

 

If not, then external knowledge must be there to identify the members of a class called selbri.

By the way as a linguist I find Lojban to be completely opaque in not using words like verb or noun or adjective.

Some newer learning resources use those terms for the benefit of speakers of English, French, Portuguese, Russian: 

1. http://mw.lojban.org/papri/The_Crash_Course_(a_draft)

2. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0Bxngu1CNj7wdSmRCNDVVbFJ4VE0/0Bxngu1CNj7wdfnh2eXU2TTFJZi1TeDV1cVlqbjl6TWxYbXgwbldRRzRoaFF5ay1oOFlWYVk 

This of course doesn't change the language. It's a purely paedagogical issue.

At the same time, the argument/predicate thing (and the sentence tree) makes no sense to me at all, and just reminds me of the horror of generative grammar. :-O

But, Gleki, if you want to work with me on this I think it would be fun, and wouldn’t take so much time perhaps.

> > sei/se'u is regular; it just is regular according to rules less simple than you would prefer.
>
> Well, it does make it impossible to apply punctuation automatically, since the only way that one could do so is to have a script that would parse a variable-lengths string following “sei” to find the word of the selbri class. Not that the application of punctuation is a goal of Lojban.
>
> I see,  so you want to put European-like punctuation at the end of {sei}-clauses. This is certainly possible. Are you planning to publish any other books apart from Alice?

Could do, if it is fun. :-)

> If yes, then it's a matter of several patches to existing parsers to output such punctuation. Instead of " SEhU-clause?" we'll just have " (SEhU-clause / { ' – ' } ) “.

So the parser can identify a selbri?

Yes, parsers can identify the structure of sentences, syntactical position of individual words. This is mostly what "parsing" means.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

[Pierre Abbat]

On Sunday, May 31, 2015 15:56:08 Michael Everson wrote:
> I guess I thought of lu/li’u and sei/se’u like opening and closing
> parentheses and having open parentheses in the language for both of those
> pairs but mandatory closing parentheses only for one of them doesn’t seem
> consistent.
> > {sei} and bridi tails have different grammar. The selbri itself terminates
> > {sei}-clause, thus the end of {sei}-clause is 100%-predictable. When the
> > selbri is encountered it's the signal that {sei}-clause just ended.
> Only if you know what a selbri is (or whether or not a given word is a
> selbri). And that means knowledge of the language, unless selbris are
> identifiable by their syllable structure or something. If not, then
> external knowledge must be there to identify the members of a class called
> selbri.

A brivla (a single-word selbri) is identifiable by ending in a vowel other than
'y', having at least two syllables whose nucleus is a vowel or diphthong not
containing 'y', and having two consonants either together or separated by 'y'.
There are corner cases involving cmavo ending in 'y' (e.g. "leky.boi mlatu"
means "K's cat", "lekyboi mlatu" means "is a cold-ball cat"), but writing
cmavo ending in 'y' together with both adjacent cmavo (unless they also end in
'y' or are "bu"-letterals) is pretty rare.

> By the way as a linguist I find Lojban to be completely opaque in not using
> words like verb or noun or adjective.

Brivla are verbs, cmene are nouns, and there are no adjectives or adverbs in
Lojban. The equivalent of a noun phrase is an article phrase, as adding an
article to a verb makes it syntactically like a verb argument (sumti). Common
nouns are expressed by verbs. There is no syntactic difference between "le
mlatu cu blabi" ("the cat is white") and "le blabi cu mlatu" (*"the white is
cat", "the white one is a cat"). There are parts of speech in Lojban that
don't exist in natlangs that I know of, such as terminators.

Pierre
--
loi mintu se ckaji danlu cu jmaji

[Gleki Arxokuna]

2015-05-31 19:36 GMT+03:00 Pierre Abbat <ph...@bezitopo.org>:

There are parts of speech in Lojban that
don't exist in natlangs that I know of, such as terminators.

the right part of circumposition is called "terminator" in Lojban.

[And Rosta]

Gleki Arxokuna, On 31/05/2015 17:53:
>
> 2015-05-31 19:36 GMT+03:00 Pierre Abbat <ph...@bezitopo.org <mailto:ph...@bezitopo.org>>:

>
> There are parts of speech in Lojban that
> don't exist in natlangs that I know of, such as terminators.
>
>
> the right part of circumposition is called "terminator" in Lojban.

That's an interesting and potentially insightful definition, but it turns an awful lot of things into adpositions. Maybe it would be better to say that the morphophonological form of a phrase is derived not by simple concatenation of the morphophonological forms of the phrase's constituents but rather by 'circumcatenation', with the morphophonological form of the head wrapped around the morphophonological form of its complement.

--And.

[Gleki Arxokuna]

2015-05-31 20:12 GMT+03:00 And Rosta <and....@gmail.com>:

Gleki Arxokuna, On 31/05/2015 17:53:

2015-05-31 19:36 GMT+03:00 Pierre Abbat <ph...@bezitopo.org <mailto:ph...@bezitopo.org>>:

    There are parts of speech in Lojban that
    don't exist in natlangs that I know of, such as terminators.


the right part of circumposition is called "terminator" in Lojban.

That's an interesting and potentially insightful definition, but it turns an awful lot of things into adpositions.

oops, true. For LE  I'm not aware of any languages that have prefixes to turn verbs into nouns. Definitely LE are not articles in it normal linguistic sense (although {le} may have some semantics of them).

Maybe it would be better to say that the morphophonological form of a phrase is derived not by simple concatenation of the morphophonological forms of the phrase's constituents but rather by 'circumcatenation', with the morphophonological form of the head wrapped around the morphophonological form of its complement.

I'd say that terminators are rather explicit markers of nodes of the tree, something that many natlangs and colloquial Lojban avoid by rephrasing and what in the rest of cases is resolved by context in natlangs and is absent in correct Lojban.

 

--And.