The Wizard of Oz
102 views
Skip to first unread message
vpbr...@gmail.com
Nov 26, 2017, 11:36:08 AM11/26/17
to lojban
coi ro do
We owe some gratitude to la selpahi, who put a lot of work into translating into lojban an entire children's book, The Wizard of Oz.
The story is a fun one for adult language learners, too, and it should be worthwhile for study.
The only trouble is that what we have is a rough draft, with plenty of errors and irregularities.
As a thank-offering finished during Thanksgiving week, I offer a draft of the book which I have extensively copy-edited, although with very little content editing.
This should be even more worthy of a student's attention.
The text has been completely spell-checked and grammar-checked by a standard parser called camxes.
Since the existing form of text exhibits some non-standard grammar and vocabulary, this has been made standard according to CLL+BPFK.
I have benefitted from previous commentary on the web pointing out some grammar issues.
One troublesome pattern found is the form of quoted speech.
We mostly have "lu X sei dy cusku lihu" instead of "lu X lihu se cusku dy".
Unfortunately when we want to connect sentences logically or temporally, we find that a quoted sentence is not a sentence; it is a fragment.
Similarly, "niho ba bo" does not work the same as "i ba bo".
These necessitated some restructuring, which was not always perfectly satisfactory.
As a matter of taste, I made some other surface changes.
The unneeded accents marked on vowels were dropped, but the decorative punctuation remains.
Many compound words now appear in a permissible form which is not that found in a dictionary: specifically CVhV compound affixes were generally replaced by long affixes. [Why, argued separately.]
Online dictionary lookups still work, of course.
The letter h represents yhy bu. Lines are formatted with "i" at the end and "niho" at the beginning.
One substantive global kind of change was made.
Among all the uses of "la", there were many cases where it is followed by a verb phrase, and where the expression is not at all a name, but a description, for example "la tolvirnu cinfo".
All such non-names got "la" replaced with "le".
As a final detail, in expressions like "the great and terrible Oz", we cannot say "banli je xlatce".
This English usage is old-fashioned, and to express this sense of "great and terrible" we want to say instead "banli je tcetepygau".
Besides the final form of text, I offer alongside it the original I worked from, a simple python reformatter, and the sed scripts that perform the copy-editing in scripted fashion, mostly one error per sed command.
This allows someone who doesn't share my preferences to alter the scripts and produce his own form, or for an auditor to examine what changed in detail.
Constructive criticism of the results can be discussed here if of public interest, otherwise just email me.
https://app.box.com/s/z3qg2kx2m2qk5xnx0gi2rk2292ek8btp
mihe la bremenli
Vincent Broman
We owe some gratitude to la selpahi, who put a lot of work into translating into lojban an entire children's book, The Wizard of Oz.
The story is a fun one for adult language learners, too, and it should be worthwhile for study.
The only trouble is that what we have is a rough draft, with plenty of errors and irregularities.
As a thank-offering finished during Thanksgiving week, I offer a draft of the book which I have extensively copy-edited, although with very little content editing.
This should be even more worthy of a student's attention.
The text has been completely spell-checked and grammar-checked by a standard parser called camxes.
Since the existing form of text exhibits some non-standard grammar and vocabulary, this has been made standard according to CLL+BPFK.
I have benefitted from previous commentary on the web pointing out some grammar issues.
One troublesome pattern found is the form of quoted speech.
We mostly have "lu X sei dy cusku lihu" instead of "lu X lihu se cusku dy".
Unfortunately when we want to connect sentences logically or temporally, we find that a quoted sentence is not a sentence; it is a fragment.
Similarly, "niho ba bo" does not work the same as "i ba bo".
These necessitated some restructuring, which was not always perfectly satisfactory.
As a matter of taste, I made some other surface changes.
The unneeded accents marked on vowels were dropped, but the decorative punctuation remains.
Many compound words now appear in a permissible form which is not that found in a dictionary: specifically CVhV compound affixes were generally replaced by long affixes. [Why, argued separately.]
Online dictionary lookups still work, of course.
The letter h represents yhy bu. Lines are formatted with "i" at the end and "niho" at the beginning.
One substantive global kind of change was made.
Among all the uses of "la", there were many cases where it is followed by a verb phrase, and where the expression is not at all a name, but a description, for example "la tolvirnu cinfo".
All such non-names got "la" replaced with "le".
As a final detail, in expressions like "the great and terrible Oz", we cannot say "banli je xlatce".
This English usage is old-fashioned, and to express this sense of "great and terrible" we want to say instead "banli je tcetepygau".
Besides the final form of text, I offer alongside it the original I worked from, a simple python reformatter, and the sed scripts that perform the copy-editing in scripted fashion, mostly one error per sed command.
This allows someone who doesn't share my preferences to alter the scripts and produce his own form, or for an auditor to examine what changed in detail.
Constructive criticism of the results can be discussed here if of public interest, otherwise just email me.
https://app.box.com/s/z3qg2kx2m2qk5xnx0gi2rk2292ek8btp
mihe la bremenli
Vincent Broman
guskant
Nov 26, 2017, 9:54:19 PM11/26/17
to lojban
ki'e la bremenli
(Thank you Vincent Broman!)
i ku'i ma'i lo si'o fukyzifpo'e kei
gau ko cu e'i pagbu
fa lo se du'u do fanva lo versiio po la selpa'i lo cu'u catni jbobau fu lo versiio po do kei
fe lo se cupra
(However, for the copyright notion, you must make the result include a description that you translated from Selpahi's version into the so-called [Note 1] official Lojban.)
ni'o i'e xamgu mi fa lo nu pagbu fa lo sed zei jufra fe lo se gubgau
(By the way, it's nice that you published it with the sed scripts.)
mi'e la guskant
(Guskant)
[Note 1]
You said you used camxes for checking the text, but there are some versions of camxes that reflect so-called official grammar without mentioning the difference.
I believe that the parsers at http://camxes.lojban.org and http://masatohagiwara.net/camxes.js/ relfect the original Camgusmis-Xorxes version of grammar, but it does not include some recent BPFK decisions like "ban on glide after consonant".
Another parser at http://lojban.github.io/ilmentufa/camxes.html used to include decisions by BPFK, but since 2016-03-27, it has been developed by the Lojban Coders' Group without any consultation with BPFK. See my report below for detail:
In order to solve this chaotic status of the so-called official Lojban, I consulted BPFK recently. One of my ideas for solution is to create github repositories owned by all and only BPFK menbers, and to maintain camxes and BPFK documents by themselves. Gleki agreed, but no others answered. See the thread below for detail:
[End of Note 1.]
And Rosta
Nov 27, 2017, 5:20:30 AM11/27/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On 26 Nov 2017 16:36, <vpbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
One substantive global kind of change was made.
Among all the uses of "la", there were many cases where it is followed by a verb phrase, and where the expression is not at all a name, but a description, for example "la tolvirnu cinfo".
All such non-names got "la" replaced with "le".
That looks a deleterious change, unless post-xorlo "le" has been completely redefined from what it formerly was. The original "la" captures properly the English, whereas semitraditional "le" does not at all. (By "semitraditional" I mean to exclude the habitual solecistic misuse that prevailed in early Lojban writing, where "le" was used as the default gadri, with sillinesses such as "le nu".)
--And.
vpbr...@gmail.com
Nov 29, 2017, 11:05:45 AM11/29/17
to lojban
And,
As I read it, xorlo "le" and "la" are pretty much the same as in CLL, except for default quantification.
In CLL around 6.2.6 I understand that a name (a cmene or a la sumti) is an arbitrary identifier, attached to something by the act of naming, instead of by reference to dictionary meanings and observation.
`` The last descriptor of this section is “la”, which indicates that the selbri which follows it has been dissociated from its normal meaning and is being used as a name. Like “le” descriptions, “la” descriptions are implicitly restricted to those I have in mind. ''
In the original translation of "the Cowardly Lion" as "la tolvirnu cinfo", for example, this identification is used because the critter is cowardly and he is a lion, it's not some kind of CB handle.
None of the "la" expressions I'm concerned about ever get used with a vocative.
They are descriptive phrases that seem to me to be very standard cases for using "le".
We should write "le xamgu termakfyfetsi", "le smani", "le rijno cutci", etc.
Is there a variety of lojban where this is not the case?
la bremenli
As I read it, xorlo "le" and "la" are pretty much the same as in CLL, except for default quantification.
In CLL around 6.2.6 I understand that a name (a cmene or a la sumti) is an arbitrary identifier, attached to something by the act of naming, instead of by reference to dictionary meanings and observation.
`` The last descriptor of this section is “la”, which indicates that the selbri which follows it has been dissociated from its normal meaning and is being used as a name. Like “le” descriptions, “la” descriptions are implicitly restricted to those I have in mind. ''
In the original translation of "the Cowardly Lion" as "la tolvirnu cinfo", for example, this identification is used because the critter is cowardly and he is a lion, it's not some kind of CB handle.
None of the "la" expressions I'm concerned about ever get used with a vocative.
They are descriptive phrases that seem to me to be very standard cases for using "le".
We should write "le xamgu termakfyfetsi", "le smani", "le rijno cutci", etc.
Is there a variety of lojban where this is not the case?
la bremenli
Michael Turniansky
Nov 29, 2017, 12:24:38 PM11/29/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Actually, Cowardly Lion is often treated as his name inasmuch as, being a lion, he didn't properly have one (note, for example, that it is always capitalized in the books). In Enchanted Island of Oz, he was briefly called "Cowy" but, thankfully, that nickname didn't stick. (That being said, I agree that "le" is better than "la" in this case.)
--gejyspa
--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
And Rosta
Nov 29, 2017, 2:06:38 PM11/29/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On 29 November 2017 at 16:05, <vpbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
And,
As I read it, xorlo "le" and "la" are pretty much the same as in CLL, except for default quantification.
In CLL around 6.2.6 I understand that a name (a cmene or a la sumti) is an arbitrary identifier, attached to something by the act of naming, instead of by reference to dictionary meanings and observation.
`` The last descriptor of this section is “la”, which indicates that the selbri which follows it has been dissociated from its normal meaning and is being used as a name. Like “le” descriptions, “la” descriptions are implicitly restricted to those I have in mind. ''
In the original translation of "the Cowardly Lion" as "la tolvirnu cinfo", for example, this identification is used because the critter is cowardly and he is a lion, it's not some kind of CB handle.
None of the "la" expressions I'm concerned about ever get used with a vocative.
They are descriptive phrases that seem to me to be very standard cases for using "le".
We should write "le xamgu termakfyfetsi", "le smani", "le rijno cutci", etc.
Is there a variety of lojban where this is not the case?
We can see from the capitalization that "Cowardly Lion" is a name; it may or may not be etymologically aptronymous, and even if it is aptronymous, the underlying description, "cowardly lion", is only the reason for why that phrase became CL's name and is not the name itself. And if the names are not used vocatively, that just suggests that the name is applied by the narrator and not by the characters. That was as far as the thinking behind my original reply got. It now also occurs to me that "la tolvirnu cinfo" doesn't distinguish between "Cowardly Lion" and "the Cowardly Lion", but I can't think of how that English distinction, whose semantic import (if there is any) is not at all apparent to me, might be rendered in Lojban. "Le tolvirnu cinfo" is, of course, not a name; and it is well to remember that "le" may be glossed "a(n)" just as well as "the", so it's as if CL were constantly referred to as "a cowardly lion", which is something nobody but Jaqen H'ghar would do. "le" primarily encodes specificity whereas English names (not even those of "the X" sort) don't.
It's interesting to wonder what translation would have been suitable had the original not been a name, and if instead the character were simply always referred to as "the cowardly lion": the main semantic ingredient contributed by the "the" then would be the definiteness. "lo bi'u nai tolvirnu cinfo" captures the definiteness but of course foregrounds it too much, and probably "lo tolvirnu cinfo" would be the best rendition.
What motivated me to make my original response was not just that "le tolvirnu cinfo" is very inferior to "la tolvirnu cinfo" as a rendition of the English but also that it was a change inflicted on somebody else's translation and furthermore was inflicted on it as if it were a correction rather than an incorrection.
--And.
la bremenli
On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 2:20:30 AM UTC-8, And Rosta wrote:On 26 Nov 2017 16:36, <vpbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
One substantive global kind of change was made.
Among all the uses of "la", there were many cases where it is followed by a verb phrase, and where the expression is not at all a name, but a description, for example "la tolvirnu cinfo".
All such non-names got "la" replaced with "le".That looks a deleterious change, unless post-xorlo "le" has been completely redefined from what it formerly was. The original "la" captures properly the English, whereas semitraditional "le" does not at all. (By "semitraditional" I mean to exclude the habitual solecistic misuse that prevailed in early Lojban writing, where "le" was used as the default gadri, with sillinesses such as "le nu".)--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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Michael Everson
Nov 29, 2017, 2:25:41 PM11/29/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
This doesn’t bother translators into Russian, for instance.
I find capitalization essential for Carroll and Baum, where nouns are used as names.
I find capitalization essential for Carroll and Baum, where nouns are used as names.
vpbr...@gmail.com
Dec 1, 2017, 9:14:04 PM12/1/17
to lojban
And,
Vocatives are used in the text by the characters, but only with cmevla, not with the descriptive "names".
I grant that some descriptive phrases in English are names, e.g. a pub named "The Prancing Horse" has a three-word name, starting with "The".
But in English a personal name never starts with "the".
It's "Fast Eddy", "Slim Pickings", "Minnesota Fats", "Deep Throat", etc, not "The Fast Eddy".
That clue shows that "The Tin Woodman" refers to a man, but not by a personal name, not even a descriptive name.
The fact that the phrases in question are capitalized by the English-speaking author does not indicate they are names, as we can see by examining his usage.
Below I quote illustrative examples from the book.
"I am a Woodman, and made of tin." is clearly an indefinite reference, and it gets capitalized.
Similarly, "a great Lion bounded into the road.", "and another a Lion.", " "A Lion!" cried the little Queen", "Others of the Monkeys" are indefinite.
The author doesn't use capitals to indicate use of a name, but rather a reference to a main character, it seems.
"Yes," answered the tin man;
"Oil my neck, first," replied the Tin Woodman.
The Tin Woodman gave a sigh of satisfaction
"No, my head is quite empty," answered the Woodman;
"I was born the son of a woodman who chopped down trees
story of the Tin Woodman,
although the Woodman fell over in the road
"And I am going to ask him to give me a heart," said the Woodman.
"Or give me a heart," said the Tin Woodman.
The Tin Woodman knew very well he had no heart,
"I am Dorothy," answered the girl; "and these are my friends, the Tin Woodman and the Cowardly Lion;
"This funny tin man," she answered, "killed the Wildcat
"I am a Woodman, and made of tin.
"Never mind the patch," exclaimed the happy Woodman.
"We must be very careful here," said the kind-hearted Woodman,
a great Lion bounded into the road.
But, to the Lion's surprise,
slapped the Lion upon his nose
"I didn't bite him," said the Lion,
a coward like me," continued the Lion, sadly.
"But that isn't right. The King of Beasts shouldn't be a coward,"
"I know it," returned the Lion,
"Do you think Oz could give me courage?" asked the cowardly Lion.
"Then, if you don't mind, I'll go with you," said the Lion,
presently Toto and the Cowardly Lion had
"Because that isn't the way we Lions do these things," he replied.
of the river, and at last came upon their friend the Lion, lying
"A Lion!" cried the little Queen; "why, he would eat us all up."
"Oh, no;" declared the Scarecrow; "this Lion is a coward."
the great Lion, of which they were much afraid.
"...why is that great Lion with you?"
and another a Lion. None of them is fit to work,
and the lion," he said to the Woodman,
Then the Witch looked at the big, shaggy Lion and asked,
it could call three times upon the Winged Monkeys,
Some of the Monkeys seized the Tin Woodman
Others of the Monkeys caught the Scarecrow,
than two of the Monkeys caught Dorothy in their arms
one little Monkey seized Toto and flew after them,
"My grandfather was at that time the King of the Winged Monkeys which
And with another bow the Monkey King spread his wings
"It shall be done," said the King, and at once the Winged Monkeys
The Monkeys had set them down near a farm house,
I still don't see a reason to view these phrases as names in English or in lojban.
la bremenli
Vocatives are used in the text by the characters, but only with cmevla, not with the descriptive "names".
I grant that some descriptive phrases in English are names, e.g. a pub named "The Prancing Horse" has a three-word name, starting with "The".
But in English a personal name never starts with "the".
It's "Fast Eddy", "Slim Pickings", "Minnesota Fats", "Deep Throat", etc, not "The Fast Eddy".
That clue shows that "The Tin Woodman" refers to a man, but not by a personal name, not even a descriptive name.
The fact that the phrases in question are capitalized by the English-speaking author does not indicate they are names, as we can see by examining his usage.
Below I quote illustrative examples from the book.
"I am a Woodman, and made of tin." is clearly an indefinite reference, and it gets capitalized.
Similarly, "a great Lion bounded into the road.", "and another a Lion.", " "A Lion!" cried the little Queen", "Others of the Monkeys" are indefinite.
The author doesn't use capitals to indicate use of a name, but rather a reference to a main character, it seems.
"Yes," answered the tin man;
"Oil my neck, first," replied the Tin Woodman.
The Tin Woodman gave a sigh of satisfaction
"No, my head is quite empty," answered the Woodman;
"I was born the son of a woodman who chopped down trees
story of the Tin Woodman,
although the Woodman fell over in the road
"And I am going to ask him to give me a heart," said the Woodman.
"Or give me a heart," said the Tin Woodman.
The Tin Woodman knew very well he had no heart,
"I am Dorothy," answered the girl; "and these are my friends, the Tin Woodman and the Cowardly Lion;
"This funny tin man," she answered, "killed the Wildcat
"I am a Woodman, and made of tin.
"Never mind the patch," exclaimed the happy Woodman.
"We must be very careful here," said the kind-hearted Woodman,
a great Lion bounded into the road.
But, to the Lion's surprise,
slapped the Lion upon his nose
"I didn't bite him," said the Lion,
a coward like me," continued the Lion, sadly.
"But that isn't right. The King of Beasts shouldn't be a coward,"
"I know it," returned the Lion,
"Do you think Oz could give me courage?" asked the cowardly Lion.
"Then, if you don't mind, I'll go with you," said the Lion,
presently Toto and the Cowardly Lion had
"Because that isn't the way we Lions do these things," he replied.
of the river, and at last came upon their friend the Lion, lying
"A Lion!" cried the little Queen; "why, he would eat us all up."
"Oh, no;" declared the Scarecrow; "this Lion is a coward."
the great Lion, of which they were much afraid.
"...why is that great Lion with you?"
and another a Lion. None of them is fit to work,
and the lion," he said to the Woodman,
Then the Witch looked at the big, shaggy Lion and asked,
it could call three times upon the Winged Monkeys,
Some of the Monkeys seized the Tin Woodman
Others of the Monkeys caught the Scarecrow,
than two of the Monkeys caught Dorothy in their arms
one little Monkey seized Toto and flew after them,
"My grandfather was at that time the King of the Winged Monkeys which
And with another bow the Monkey King spread his wings
"It shall be done," said the King, and at once the Winged Monkeys
The Monkeys had set them down near a farm house,
I still don't see a reason to view these phrases as names in English or in lojban.
la bremenli
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 https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
And Rosta
Dec 2, 2017, 10:33:56 AM12/2/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On 2 Dec 2017 02:14, <vpbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
And,
Vocatives are used in the text by the characters, but only with cmevla, not with the descriptive "names".
I grant that some descriptive phrases in English are names, e.g. a pub named "The Prancing Horse" has a three-word name, starting with "The".
But in English a personal name never starts with "the".
It's "Fast Eddy", "Slim Pickings", "Minnesota Fats", "Deep Throat", etc, not "The Fast Eddy".
Inherently onomastic nouns like _Eddy_ don't normally occur with _the_ when not premodified, but nicknames and character names perfectly well can, e.g. names of professional wrestlers (the Ringmaster, the Iceman, the Great Kabuki), _the Black Prince_ (i.e. Edward of Woodstock), and so forth.
The fact that the phrases in question are capitalized by the English-speaking author does not indicate they are names, as we can see by examining his usage.
Below I quote illustrative examples from the book.
"I am a Woodman, and made of tin." is clearly an indefinite reference, and it gets capitalized.
Similarly, "a great Lion bounded into the road.", "and another a Lion.", " "A Lion!" cried the little Queen", "Others of the Monkeys" are indefinite.
The author doesn't use capitals to indicate use of a name, but rather a reference to a main character, it seems.
It looks like capitalization is here being used both with its semantic narrowing function, as when in documents internal to a particular bank, it is referred to as "the Bank", which is tantamount to onomastic function, or "a Cruel and Unusual Punishment", whose defining criteria are those not of ordinary English but rather of the US constitution, and as marking the names of races (as in "a Scot", "a Briton", "a Dwarf"). Not all names are arbitrary.
When rendering these sorts of unarbitrary name into Lojban, a vacillation between "lo" and "la" would be understandable, tho I myself would be inclined pretty much to treat English capitalization as the criterion for using "la" in place of "lo". I suppose it stands to reason that if "lo" may be used with unarbitrary names then so may "le". In my earlier messages I had said that "le" seems unsuitable for rendering "the" in the main, but that presupposes a certain understanding of "le", the logical form of which makes it pretty much equivalent to "a certain", whereas I suppose that CLL could be interpreted in a way that makes it more consistent with "the", tho in that case I would struggle to see how it differs from xorlo "lo" (which probably explains why xorlovian apologists favour jettisoning all gadri but "lo" and "la").
--And.
gleki.is...@gmail.com
Dec 2, 2017, 12:26:00 PM12/2/17
to lojban
Didn't you miss the `` The last descriptor of this section is “la”, which indicates that the selbri which follows it has been dissociated from its normal meaning and is being used as a name. Like “le” descriptions, “la” descriptions are implicitly restricted to those I have in mind. ''
part quoted by la bremenli?
It looks consistent across CLL even including vocatives with gadri omitted.
And Rosta
Dec 3, 2017, 5:49:36 AM12/3/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
I didn't miss it. CLL is mostly an informal attempt to describe technical linguistic notions succinctly to laypeople, so as with most forms of communication, but not necessarily the codification of rules and laws, it is necessary to read it in the context of what one presumes the author was intending to communicate.
--And
Gleki Arxokuna
Dec 3, 2017, 7:12:33 AM12/3/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Then what does this quote mean? Nothing and should be ignored according to you?
--And--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/HYraAvzntd4/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
And Rosta
Dec 3, 2017, 1:35:00 PM12/3/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On 3 Dec 2017 12:12, "Gleki Arxokuna" <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:
2017-12-03 13:49 GMT+03:00 And Rosta <and....@gmail.com>:On 2 Dec 2017 17:26, <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:
Em sábado, 2 de dezembro de 2017 18:33:56 UTC+3, And Rosta escreveu:When rendering these sorts of unarbitrary name into Lojban, a vacillation between "lo" and "la" would be understandable, tho I myself would be inclined pretty much to treat English capitalization as the criterion for using "la" in place of "lo". I suppose it stands to reason that if "lo" may be used with unarbitrary names then so may "le". In my earlier messages I had said that "le" seems unsuitable for rendering "the" in the main, but that presupposes a certain understanding of "le", the logical form of which makes it pretty much equivalent to "a certain", whereas I suppose that CLL could be interpreted in a way that makes it more consistent with "the", tho in that case I would struggle to see how it differs from xorlo "lo" (which probably explains why xorlovian apologists favour jettisoning all gadri but "lo" and "la").Didn't you miss the `` The last descriptor of this section is “la”, which indicates that the selbri which follows it has been dissociated from its normal meaning and is being used as a name. Like “le” descriptions, “la” descriptions are implicitly restricted to those I have in mind. ''part quoted by la bremenli?I didn't miss it. CLL is mostly an informal attempt to describe technical linguistic notions succinctly to laypeople, so as with most forms of communication, but not necessarily the codification of rules and laws, it is necessary to read it in the context of what one presumes the author was intending to communicate.Then what does this quote mean? Nothing and should be ignored according to you?
"Dissociated from its normal meaning" is an informal attempt to describe the notion "used as a name" succinctly to laypeople. The literal meaning of the second sentence is fairly self-evident, but makes more sense under the 'is called X' model of the meaning of names.
--And.
vpbr...@gmail.com
Dec 10, 2017, 1:53:34 AM12/10/17
to lojban
And Rosta,
From your examples, I grant that some personal names start with "The".
I agree with you that Capitalization in these phrases in the book serves a semantic narrowing function like "the Bank", although this is not at all tantamount to onomastic.
Your last paragraph I cannot make head nor tail of.
A claim that "le" is unsuitable for rendering "the" in the main is clearly at odds with the grammars I have seen, esp. CLL 6.2
``and in fact “le” is quite close in meaning to English “the”. ''
The phrase "a certain" can be appropriate for the first reference to something definite with "le", but not to later references to the same thing, where we would still use "le" and "the".
The xorlo definitional difference between "le" and "la" depends pretty much on the difference between "cmene" and "skicu do".
A cmene depends critically on an act of naming, with or without any reference to the meaning of the selbri used as name.
The ve skicu depends only on the meaning of the selbri and on the context.
In the book phrases there is abundant evidence that the ve skicu is essential, and no evidence of any act of naming other than the evidence of capitalization, which we seem to agree means something else here.
I am trying to stand squarely in the CLL+BPFK mainstream here, and I'm not sure that that is your goal here.
If you have some additional evidence against "le" to bring up, I'm all ears.
Vincent Broman, la bremenli
From your examples, I grant that some personal names start with "The".
I agree with you that Capitalization in these phrases in the book serves a semantic narrowing function like "the Bank", although this is not at all tantamount to onomastic.
Your last paragraph I cannot make head nor tail of.
A claim that "le" is unsuitable for rendering "the" in the main is clearly at odds with the grammars I have seen, esp. CLL 6.2
``and in fact “le” is quite close in meaning to English “the”. ''
The phrase "a certain" can be appropriate for the first reference to something definite with "le", but not to later references to the same thing, where we would still use "le" and "the".
The xorlo definitional difference between "le" and "la" depends pretty much on the difference between "cmene" and "skicu do".
A cmene depends critically on an act of naming, with or without any reference to the meaning of the selbri used as name.
The ve skicu depends only on the meaning of the selbri and on the context.
In the book phrases there is abundant evidence that the ve skicu is essential, and no evidence of any act of naming other than the evidence of capitalization, which we seem to agree means something else here.
I am trying to stand squarely in the CLL+BPFK mainstream here, and I'm not sure that that is your goal here.
If you have some additional evidence against "le" to bring up, I'm all ears.
Vincent Broman, la bremenli
Gregorio Guidi
Dec 29, 2017, 11:09:50 AM12/29/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On 11/27/2017 03:54 AM, guskant wrote:
> [...]
repositories as mentioned above? I have seen some recent discussions on
the bpfk list on the topic of github/gitlab, but it would be nice if any
relevant update could be shared here.
By the way, to better understand the current situation, could you
clarify which are the users that have "owner" privileges on the "lojban"
github account, as of now?
Thanks,
Gregorio
> [...]
>
> [Note 1]
>
> You said you used camxes for checking the text, but there are some
> versions of camxes that reflect so-called official grammar without
> mentioning the difference.
> I believe that the parsers at http://camxes.lojban.org and
> http://masatohagiwara.net/camxes.js/ relfect the original
> Camgusmis-Xorxes version of grammar, but it does not include some
> recent BPFK decisions like "ban on glide after consonant".
> Another parser at http://lojban.github.io/ilmentufa/camxes.html used
> to include decisions by BPFK, but since 2016-03-27, it has been
> developed by the Lojban Coders' Group without any consultation with
> BPFK. See my report below for detail:
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/e94H-wdh5gc/u2tzLm74AQAJ
>
> In order to solve this chaotic status of the so-called official
> Lojban, I consulted BPFK recently. One of my ideas for solution is to
> create github repositories owned by all and only BPFK menbers, and to
> maintain camxes and BPFK documents by themselves. Gleki agreed, but no
> others answered. See the thread below for detail:
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bpfk-list/saI34rwnvw8/discussion
Hello, is there any update on the proposal to create separate github
> [Note 1]
>
> You said you used camxes for checking the text, but there are some
> versions of camxes that reflect so-called official grammar without
> mentioning the difference.
> I believe that the parsers at http://camxes.lojban.org and
> http://masatohagiwara.net/camxes.js/ relfect the original
> Camgusmis-Xorxes version of grammar, but it does not include some
> recent BPFK decisions like "ban on glide after consonant".
> Another parser at http://lojban.github.io/ilmentufa/camxes.html used
> to include decisions by BPFK, but since 2016-03-27, it has been
> developed by the Lojban Coders' Group without any consultation with
> BPFK. See my report below for detail:
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/e94H-wdh5gc/u2tzLm74AQAJ
>
> In order to solve this chaotic status of the so-called official
> Lojban, I consulted BPFK recently. One of my ideas for solution is to
> create github repositories owned by all and only BPFK menbers, and to
> maintain camxes and BPFK documents by themselves. Gleki agreed, but no
> others answered. See the thread below for detail:
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bpfk-list/saI34rwnvw8/discussion
repositories as mentioned above? I have seen some recent discussions on
the bpfk list on the topic of github/gitlab, but it would be nice if any
relevant update could be shared here.
By the way, to better understand the current situation, could you
clarify which are the users that have "owner" privileges on the "lojban"
github account, as of now?
Thanks,
Gregorio
Gleki Arxokuna
Dec 29, 2017, 11:16:33 AM12/29/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
What stops you from making a new repo within or outside a particular github account NOW?
There are already around 200 repositories on github explicitly mentioning "lojban" in their descriptions. And they are from different accounts.
Thanks,
Gregorio
guskant
Dec 30, 2017, 12:43:41 AM12/30/17
to lojban
Le vendredi 29 décembre 2017 16:09:50 UTC, Gregorio Guidi a écrit :
Hello, is there any update on the proposal to create separate github
repositories as mentioned above? I have seen some recent discussions on
the bpfk list on the topic of github/gitlab, but it would be nice if any
relevant update could be shared here.
The proposal of creating a github organisation account of BPFK is discussed here:
There was an alternative suggestion to do that rather on Gitlab instead of Github. In the case that the BPFK will copy some repositories of the Lojban Coders' Group into Gitlab, the treatment of issues that are already put on Github seems to be difficult, and the discussion is slowly ongoing.
By the way, to better understand the current situation, could you
clarify which are the users that have "owner" privileges on the "lojban"
github account, as of now?
I don't know which members have the owner privilege on the Lojban Coders' Group.
mi'e la guskant
Gregorio Guidi
Dec 30, 2017, 4:04:10 AM12/30/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On December 30, 2017 6:43:40 AM CET, guskant <gusni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>The proposal of creating a github organisation account of BPFK is
>discussed
>here:
>
>https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bpfk-list/cq6bheKFN3A/discussion
>
>There was an alternative suggestion to do that rather on Gitlab instead
>of
>Github. In the case that the BPFK will copy some repositories of the
>Lojban
>Coders' Group into Gitlab, the treatment of issues that are already put
>on
>Github seems to be difficult, and the discussion is slowly ongoing.
>
>> By the way, to better understand the current situation, could you
>> clarify which are the users that have "owner" privileges on the
>"lojban"
>> github account, as of now?
>>
>>
>I don't know which members have the owner privilege on the Lojban
>Coders'
>Group.
doi rodo If anyone knows the answer to the last question, I would be interested to know.
Gregorio
Gleki Arxokuna
Dec 30, 2017, 4:18:32 AM12/30/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
2017-12-30 12:04 GMT+03:00 Gregorio Guidi <gre...@posteo.net>:
doi rodo If anyone knows the answer to the last question, I would be interested to know.
Gregorio Guidi
Dec 30, 2017, 7:38:55 AM12/30/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On 12/30/2017 10:17 AM, Gleki Arxokuna
wrote:
2017-12-30 12:04 GMT+03:00 Gregorio Guidi <gre...@posteo.net>:
doi rodo If anyone knows the answer to the last question, I would be interested to know.
There are more but they are private owners.
That's exactly where I was looking for more information. In fact the
list of public members does not help, since members are not
necessarily the same as owners.
See here for instance: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20144295/github-api-v3-determine-if-user-is-an-owner-of-an-organization
See here for instance: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20144295/github-api-v3-determine-if-user-is-an-owner-of-an-organization
Gleki Arxokuna
Dec 31, 2017, 12:03:29 AM12/31/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
2017-12-30 15:38 GMT+03:00 Gregorio Guidi <gre...@posteo.net>:
On 12/30/2017 10:17 AM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote:
2017-12-30 12:04 GMT+03:00 Gregorio Guidi <gre...@posteo.net>:
doi rodo If anyone knows the answer to the last question, I would be interested to know.
There are more but they are private owners.
That's exactly where I was looking for more information. In fact the list of public members does not help, since members are not necessarily the same as owners.
Why do you need this information?
Gregorio Guidi
Dec 31, 2017, 4:27:06 AM12/31/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On 12/31/2017 06:02 AM, Gleki Arxokuna
wrote:
2017-12-30 15:38 GMT+03:00 Gregorio Guidi <gre...@posteo.net>:
On 12/30/2017 10:17 AM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote:
2017-12-30 12:04 GMT+03:00 Gregorio Guidi <gre...@posteo.net>:
doi rodo If anyone knows the answer to the last question, I would be interested to know.
There are more but they are private owners.
That's exactly where I was looking for more information. In fact the list of public members does not help, since members are not necessarily the same as owners.
Why do you need this information?
The thread started in reference to the stated conflict between the
BPFK and the Lojban Coders Group. It is not apparent from public
sources who controls the Lojban Coders Group account on github,
which is of course key information to understand the dynamics of
this apparent conflict affecting core Lojban assets. Hence the
question.
This is a very specific question, with a specific answer. Yet you have posted three times in this thread already without providing any useful information, which makes for a rather awful signal-to-noise ratio. Do you know the answer or not?
If not, please think whether the thread needs a 4th post from your part that would make the signal-to-noise ratio even worse.
Gregorio
This is a very specific question, with a specific answer. Yet you have posted three times in this thread already without providing any useful information, which makes for a rather awful signal-to-noise ratio. Do you know the answer or not?
If not, please think whether the thread needs a 4th post from your part that would make the signal-to-noise ratio even worse.
Gregorio
Gleki Arxokuna
Dec 31, 2017, 4:41:05 AM12/31/17
to loj...@googlegroups.com
I know the answer because I'm one of the owners but that's the only public information I have right to tell.
And given the records of LLG or BPFK publicly available I can't see this group has ever been affiliated with BPFK or LLG. This is simply a group of people interested in Lojban, kinda club.
That BPFK or LLG or some of its members think that a "group" has any conflict they can contact it via the addresses provided. If BPFK or LLG thinks that it violates some trademarks etc. they can contact github.com owners or sue github.com so that the group is blocked or its ownership is transferred.
If not, please think whether the thread needs a 4th post from your part that would make the signal-to-noise ratio even worse.
Gregorio
--
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages