# A suggestion for the Lojban names of weekdays and months.

125 views

### Jonathan Jones

Oct 5, 2010, 10:54:39 PM10/5/10
(I'm double-posting this to both lojban lists, please respond on the beginner's.)
-----
Days:
-----

A discussion about the names of the weekdays was recently held in the thread "[lojban] la za'e filjvocedra (The Age of Easy Lujvo)", about the pros and cons of the two current methods of naming the days of the week - one based on numbers, the other on concepts. {pavdei} "1-day" = {lurdei} "moon-day", to provide an example.

In this discussion, .xorxes. pointed out that the current number method is anti-intuitive, because it seems as though, for example {mumdei} would mean "five days", not "fifth day". As corollary, he pointed out two examples: {reljeftu}, "fortnight", and {mumymentu}, "five minutes". To quote him, "[T]he place structure of {djedi} screams for 'N-dei' to mean {djedi be li N}, not {djedi me'e li N}."

Personally, I found this to be a very convincing argument against the use of {pavdei} et al. as names of weekdays. It is also, if I am correct, his main reason for preferring the concept way.

I, on the other hand, do not like the concept method, for the simple reason that I really, really like having a systematic method, and that is anything but. After more discussion, I came up with the following, which is agreeable to both .xorxes. and me.

It's actually basically the exact same thing as {pavdei}, etc., except backwards. So, they would be:

{djeno} "0-day"/{djeze} "7-day" = Sunday
{djepa} "1-day" = Monday
{djere} "2-day" = Tuesday
{djeci} "3-day" = Wednesday
{djevo} "4-day" = Thursday
{djemu} "5-day" = Friday
{djexa} "6-day" = Saturday

All eight of the above words have the exact same meaning as both current methods: "x1 is a [weekday name] of week x2 in month x3"

The benefits of this method are that it is logical, systematic, and doesn't conflict with spans (as in {mumdei} = "a five day span").

The con is, obviously, they take up 8 spots in gismu space, which may or may not be an atrocity, depending on your viewpoint.

-----
Months:
-----

Through further discussion, we have also come up with a really good method for month-naming. Currently, the only Lojban words we have for the months are cmevla, i.e. {.pamast.}, {.remast.}, etc. .xorxes. came up with a really good alternative, similar to my idea with the weeks, for each of the months, which are the following fu'ivla, based around {lunra}:

{lunrapa} "1-month" = January
{lunrare} "2-month" = February
{lunraci} "3-month" = March
{lunravo} "4-month" = April
{lunramu} "5-month" = May
{lunraxa} "6-month" = June
{lunraze} "7-month" = July
{lunrabi} "8-month" = August
{lunraso} "9-month" = September
{lunrafei} "11-month" = November
{lunragai} "12-month" = December

This has the advantage over the current cmevla method in that, being fu'ivla, we can give them place structure and use them in all the ways cmene can NOT be used. I don't see any cons at all, but I may be mistaken.

Since it is .xorxes. idea, I direct you to him for the proposed definitions, although I'm certain that it will begin "x1 is month N ...."

-----

In conclusion, it is my desire to inform the whole of jbogugde about these ideas and to get feedback , and to possibly confuse you lot to start using them whenever you are talking about days of the week or about months.

Feedback, suggestions, criticisms, praise, and flaming are all welcome and appreciated. :D

(I'm double-posting this to both lojban lists, please respond on the beginner's.)

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

### Luke Bergen

Oct 5, 2010, 11:27:52 PM10/5/10
I like it.  My only comment is, what's wrong with cmevla?  Why not make them .djepav. etc...  Given xorxes' other proposal about merging cmevla into brivla, this wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing (assuming that I understand his other proposal well enough) and it wouldn't be infringing on the gismu space (not that I'm all that uncomfortable with that).

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginne...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.

### Jonathan Jones

Oct 5, 2010, 11:36:24 PM10/5/10
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Luke Bergen wrote:
I like it.  My only comment is, what's wrong with cmevla?  Why not make them .djepav. etc...  Given xorxes' other proposal about merging cmevla into brivla, this wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing (assuming that I understand his other proposal well enough) and it wouldn't be infringing on the gismu space (not that I'm all that uncomfortable with that).

No reason other than it depends on .xorxes. proposal being approved. Actually, I'm ambivalent about {.djepav.} et al. over {djepa} et al.; as far as I'm concerned they're equivalent, especially in consideration of .xorxes. proposal to merge cmevla with brivla. But, unless and until .xorxes. merger proposal is accepted, cmevla can't have definitions like "{.djepav.} = 'x1 is a Monday of week x2 in month x3'", because as it stands, all cmevla have the same meaning, excepting the tiny detail of what the name is.

However, I don't think using {.djepav.} instead is really all that great a benefit, because if we use it, and then for some reason decide to create a meaning for {djepa}, and it doesn't have anything to do with {.djepav.}, I'm certain massive confusions will arise from it.

### Jonathan Jones

Oct 6, 2010, 1:33:57 AM10/6/10
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Jonathan Jones wrote:
<snip>

In conclusion, it is my desire to inform the whole of jbogugde about these ideas and to get feedback , and to possibly confuse you lot to start using them whenever you are talking about days of the week or about months.
<snip>

Um, I just noticed this, so forgive me, I meant to say "convince you lot", not "confuse you lot".

### Lindar

Oct 6, 2010, 2:15:27 AM10/6/10
to Lojban Beginners
As grand as all of this is, I would have to say hell no.

To take up that many spaces for named days of the week?

Also, xorxes' suggested merge of cmeva and brivla doesn't seem likely.

Why not {pavmomdei}? We already have {bavlamdei} and {prulamdei} so
another three-rafsi lujvo isn't that terrible.

I can appreciate that you found the fault in the current scheme, but
your proposal is a terrible idea.

The zi'evla for the months, not so much. I think it's kinda cool.

Really, the whole idea behind the proposal is pretty cool.

However, you'll never get a proposal passed for -that much- gismu
space for something that ridiculous.

{prudei} - a previous day
{prulamdei} - yesterday
{cabdei} - today
{bavlamdei} - tomorrow
{bavdei} - a future day

nonmomdei
pavmomdei
relmomdei
cibmomdei
vonmomdei
mumymomdei
xavmomdei
zelmomdei

or even...

djenonmoi
djepavmoi
djerelmoi
djecibmoi
djevonmoi
djemomymoi
djezelmoi

### Remo Dentato

Oct 6, 2010, 2:21:01 AM10/6/10
to lojban-beginners
On Wednesday, October 6, 2010, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:

> -----
> Days:
> -----
> {djeNN}
I like it. giving a gismu-like name to weekdays seems more a good
thing thana bad thing to me!

> -----
> Months:
> -----
>months [...] are the following fu'ivla, based around {lunra}:

The only doubt that I have about using {lunra} is that it may suggest
a lunar calendar wih 28, 29 or 30 days months plus some extra day here
and there like it happens today for some culture. unfortunately I have
no alternative suggestion.

remod

### Remo Dentato

Oct 6, 2010, 2:46:18 AM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Lindar <lindar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> As grand as all of this is, I would have to say hell no.
>
> To take up that many spaces for named days of the week?

I don't think is very likely to create new gismu these days. And even
if we were doing that, those would be too similar gismu to be used for
different meanings (I seem to remember that this was one of the
criteria when gisum were chosen).

So, i don't see this as a major showstopper for the proposal.

remod

### David Gowers (kampu)

Oct 6, 2010, 3:37:39 AM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Remo Dentato <rden...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Lindar <lindar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> As grand as all of this is, I would have to say hell no.
>>
>> To take up that many spaces for named days of the week?
>
> I don't think is very likely to create new gismu these days. And even
> if we were doing that, those would be too similar gismu to be used for
> different meanings (I seem to remember that this was one of the
> criteria when gisum were chosen).

[bakni, bakfu, bakri],
[balji, balni, balre, balvi],
[bancu, bandu, banfi, bangu, banli, banxa, banzu], (!)
[barda, bargu, barja, barna, bartu],
[basna, basti],
[batci, batke]]

(and that is just for 'b'!)

### Remo Dentato

Oct 6, 2010, 4:05:47 AM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 9:37 AM, David Gowers (kampu) <00a...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Remo Dentato <rden...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Lindar <lindar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> As grand as all of this is, I would have to say hell no.
>>>
>>> To take up that many spaces for named days of the week?
>>
>> I don't think is very likely to create new gismu these days. And even
>> if we were doing that, those would be too similar gismu to be used for
>> different meanings (I seem to remember that this was one of the
>> criteria when gisum were chosen).
>
> [..]

> [batci, batke]]
>
> (and that is just for 'b'!)

Ok, point taken.

But still the probability of making new gismu these day (and in the
foreseeable future) seems low to me.

### Lindar

Oct 6, 2010, 4:29:58 AM10/6/10
to Lojban Beginners
Either way, the point still stands. xorxes' proposal is likely to
continue to be ignored. Your proposal to take up eight places in gismu
space for days of the week will be shot down. Unless you can format
your argument entirely in very understandable Lojban, you're not going
to get even one word into gismu space. It's just not going to happen.

So, you can either go with my suggestion, use the current standard, or
go with something like what selkik has proposed in another thread.
That's pretty much what you're down to.

Oct 6, 2010, 5:03:32 AM10/6/10
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Jonathan Jones wrote:
(I'm double-posting this to both lojban lists, please respond on the beginner's.)
-----
Days:
-----

A discussion about the names of the weekdays was recently held in the thread "[lojban] la za'e filjvocedra (The Age of Easy Lujvo)", about the pros and cons of the two current methods of naming the days of the week - one based on numbers, the other on concepts. {pavdei} "1-day" = {lurdei} "moon-day", to provide an example.

In this discussion, .xorxes. pointed out that the current number method is anti-intuitive, because it seems as though, for example {mumdei} would mean "five days", not "fifth day". As corollary, he pointed out two examples: {reljeftu}, "fortnight", and {mumymentu}, "five minutes". To quote him, "[T]he place structure of {djedi} screams for 'N-dei' to mean {djedi be li N}, not {djedi me'e li N}."

Personally, I found this to be a very convincing argument against the use of {pavdei} et al. as names of weekdays. It is also, if I am correct, his main reason for preferring the concept way.

I, on the other hand, do not like the concept method, for the simple reason that I really, really like having a systematic method, and that is anything but. After more discussion, I came up with the following, which is agreeable to both .xorxes. and me.

It's actually basically the exact same thing as {pavdei}, etc., except backwards. So, they would be:

{djeno} "0-day"/{djeze} "7-day" = Sunday
{djepa} "1-day" = Monday
{djere} "2-day" = Tuesday
{djeci} "3-day" = Wednesday
{djevo} "4-day" = Thursday
{djemu} "5-day" = Friday
{djexa} "6-day" = Saturday

All eight of the above words have the exact same meaning as both current methods: "x1 is a [weekday name] of week x2 in month x3"

The benefits of this method are that it is logical, systematic, and doesn't conflict with spans (as in {mumdei} = "a five day span").

The con is, obviously, they take up 8 spots in gismu space, which may or may not be an atrocity, depending on your viewpoint.

Rather than create several similar gismu with almost identical meanings, why not just create lujvo with "zei"? That's what "zei" is for, right?

djedi zei no/djedi zei ze = Sunday
djedi zei pa = Monday
djedi zei re = Tuesday
djedi zei ci = Wednesday
djedi zei vo = Thursday
djedi zei mu = Friday
djedi zei xa = Saturday

-----
Months:
-----

Through further discussion, we have also come up with a really good method for month-naming. Currently, the only Lojban words we have for the months are cmevla, i.e. {.pamast.}, {.remast.}, etc. .xorxes. came up with a really good alternative, similar to my idea with the weeks, for each of the months, which are the following fu'ivla, based around {lunra}:

{lunrapa} "1-month" = January
{lunrare} "2-month" = February
{lunraci} "3-month" = March
{lunravo} "4-month" = April
{lunramu} "5-month" = May
{lunraxa} "6-month" = June
{lunraze} "7-month" = July
{lunrabi} "8-month" = August
{lunraso} "9-month" = September
{lunrafei} "11-month" = November
{lunragai} "12-month" = December

This has the advantage over the current cmevla method in that, being fu'ivla, we can give them place structure and use them in all the ways cmene can NOT be used. I don't see any cons at all, but I may be mistaken.

Since it is .xorxes. idea, I direct you to him for the proposed definitions, although I'm certain that it will begin "x1 is month N ...."

-----

Here I see no reason to use "lunra" when "masti" is available. Using "zei" as above, we get

masti zei pa = January
masti zei re = February
masti zei ci = March
masti zei vo = April
masti zei mu = May
masti zei xa = June
masti zei ze = July
masti zei bi = August
masti zei so = September
masti zei pano / masti zei dau = October
masti zei papa / masti zei fei = November
masti zei pare / masti zei gai = December

How's that?

stevo

In conclusion, it is my desire to inform the whole of jbogugde about these ideas and to get feedback , and to possibly confuse you lot to start using them whenever you are talking about days of the week or about months.

Feedback, suggestions, criticisms, praise, and flaming are all welcome and appreciated. :D

(I'm double-posting this to both lojban lists, please respond on the beginner's.)

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

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

### Remo Dentato

Oct 6, 2010, 7:57:18 AM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Lindar <lindar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Your proposal to take up eight places in gismu
> space for days of the week will be shot down. [...]

> That's pretty much what you're down to.

I love your accomodating, open-ended way of offering suggestions :)

btw, Why not try to take advantage of the good points on xorxes proposal?

What if we use:

{djenon} "0-day"/{djezel} "7-day" = Sunday
{djepav} "1-day" = Monday
{djerel} "2-day" = Tuesday
{djecib} "3-day" = Wednesday
{djevon} "4-day" = Thursday
{djemum} "5-day" = Friday
{djexav} "6-day" = Saturday

?

They are cmene obtained with {dje-} for {djedi} and the rafsi for the number.

### Jorge Llambías

Oct 6, 2010, 8:59:45 AM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 3:15 AM, Lindar <lindar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Why not {pavmomdei}? We already have {bavlamdei} and {prulamdei} so
> another three-rafsi lujvo isn't that terrible.

One possible issue with ordinals is the potential for confusion
between first of the week and first of the month, or even first of the
year. That may or may not be a problem, but since numbers are already
used to name days according to their position in the month, using
numbers to also name them according to their position in the week has
to be done carefully so that the two systems don't enter into
conflict.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

### Jorge Llambías

Oct 6, 2010, 9:04:10 AM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 6:03 AM, MorphemeAddict <lyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> {lunrapa} "1-month" = January
>> {lunrare} "2-month" = February
>> {lunraci} "3-month" = March
>> {lunravo} "4-month" = April
>> {lunramu} "5-month" = May
>> {lunraxa} "6-month" = June
>> {lunraze} "7-month" = July
>> {lunrabi} "8-month" = August
>> {lunraso} "9-month" = September
>> {lunrafei} "11-month" = November
>> {lunragai} "12-month" = December
>>
> Here I see no reason to use "lunra" when "masti" is available.

"masti" wouldn't work there because "st" is a valid initial, so
"mastipa" = "ma stipa".

> Using "zei" as above, we get
>
> masti zei pa = January
> masti zei re = February
> masti zei ci = March
> masti zei vo = April
> masti zei mu = May
> masti zei xa = June
> masti zei ze = July
> masti zei bi = August
> masti zei so = September
> masti zei pano / masti zei dau = October
> masti zei papa / masti zei fei = November
> masti zei pare / masti zei gai = December
>
> How's that?

You need:

masti zei pa zei no
masti zei pa zei pa
masti zei pa zei re

### Remo Dentato

Oct 6, 2010, 10:16:24 AM10/6/10
2010/10/6 Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com>:

> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 6:03 AM, MorphemeAddict <lyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Here I see no reason to use "lunra" when "masti" is available.
>
> "masti" wouldn't work there because "st" is a valid initial, so
> "mastipa" = "ma stipa".

If having cmene for months and days names would work (I'm not clear if
there's any problem with that) we could have {ma'ipav} for January and
so on up to {ma'igaib} ('b' added arbitrarily) or {ma'iparel} for
December.

Is there any problem on having a cmene rather than a brivla? After all
it's what January is: a name.

Remo

### Remo Dentato

Oct 6, 2010, 10:24:20 AM10/6/10
BTW we are talking about the Gregorian Calendar, right?

I always thought that Lojbanistan was using International Fixed
Calendar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar)
for cultural neutrality!

:)

### Jorge Llambías

Oct 6, 2010, 11:29:55 AM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Remo Dentato <rden...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If having cmene for months and days names would work (I'm not clear if
> there's any problem with that) we could have {ma'ipav} for January and
> so on up to {ma'igaib} ('b' added arbitrarily) or {ma'iparel} for
> December.

We already have pamast, remast, cimast, etc as cmevla. The thing with
cmevla is their artificially restricted grammar, so I can't use "la
.cimast. cicyractu" for "the March Hare" in Alice, and I refuse to use
"la me la .cimast. cicyractu".

(I currently have "la cibymasti cicyractu", but to me that sounds more
like "the Three Months Old Hare".)

> Is there any problem on having a cmene rather than a brivla? After all
> it's what January is: a name.

It would be much less of a problem if cmevla were syntactically more flexible.

Oct 6, 2010, 1:21:07 AM10/6/10
to Lojban Beginners
I am extremely for this idea. I'm a system freak, and think that this
way will fit lojban much better than the concept (japanese, chinese)
way, as well as being easy to remember and learn.
I personally like how it sounds ending in a vowel myself, but that's
just my opinion.
I also think it's brilliant to use {lunra} for the months. Because,
well, it makes sense. You say {djepa} and you know oh, it's {day-1}.
You say {lunrapa} and you know oh, it's {moon-[cycle]-1}. It just
makes sense. To me at least.
In short, I like it! Do it!

On Oct 5, 8:36 pm, Jonathan Jones <eyeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> .
> >> For more options, visit this group at
>
> >  --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Lojban Beginners" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > .

### Michael Eaton

Oct 6, 2010, 5:35:52 AM10/6/10
Regardless of whether of not the use of gismu space is allowed, I don't really see any truly compelling reason why it shouldn't. The ability to accurately and clearly define a specific day of the week is a not entirely inconsequential function of language, and, regardless of who you are, it IS a part of your everyday communication. The difference between being able to say 'tuesday', as opposed to having to say 'the day two days after the next day', is not one to be overlooked.

As far as the existing standards for naming / numbering days go, the 'numeric' standard, as rightly pointed out, can cause some syntax issues, though these are slight and not amazingly difficult to work around, while the 'conceptual' standard is rather un-lojban in approach, being far less intuitive than a numbered system.

As for alternatives proposed in this very thread, would you really rather use, for instance, a fairly wieldy lujvo for so simple a concept as days of the week?

I'm not saying that days of the week SHOULD take up gismu space, nor am I saying that they will, I'm merely pointing out that the alternatives come with their own problems, and the use of gismu space would hardly be the travesty it is being made out to be.

-----Original Message-----
Sent: 06 October 2010 09:30
To: Lojban Beginners
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: A suggestion for the Lojban names of
weekdays and months.

Either way, the point still stands. xorxes' proposal is likely to

continue to be ignored. Your proposal to take up eight places in gismu

space for days of the week will be shot down. Unless you can format
your argument entirely in very understandable Lojban, you're not going
to get even one word into gismu space. It's just not going to happen.

So, you can either go with my suggestion, use the current standard, or
go with something like what selkik has proposed in another thread.

That's pretty much what you're down to.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginne...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.

http://www.blackpool.gov.uk/EmailDisclaimer/
This message has been scanned for inappropriate or malicious content as part of the Council's e-mail and Internet policies.

http://www.blackpool.gov.uk/EmailDisclaimer/
This message has been scanned for inappropriate or malicious content as part of the Council's e-mail and Internet policies.

******************************************************************************See the Blackpool You Tube video aimed at attracting French visitors by clicking this link http://www.visitblackpool.com/jetaime ******************************************************************************

### Ruler11

Oct 6, 2010, 11:08:33 AM10/6/10
to Lojban Beginners
"lunra" is for lunar calendar. Not a good idea. Yea, that's cute
indeed. But "masti" is the only possible valsi.

Can't accept it.

### .alyn.post.

Oct 6, 2010, 11:45:05 AM10/6/10
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:15:27PM -0700, Lindar wrote:
> However, you'll never get a proposal passed for -that much- gismu
> space for something that ridiculous.
>

Lindar,

So that I might better understand, what kind of proposal would be
insufficiently ridiculous for proposing 7 gismu? I'd like to better
understand what is and isn't a worthly proposal for adding gismu,
outside of this specific proposal to add 7 gismu for days of the
week.

-Alan
--
.i ko djuno fi le do sevzi

### Luke Bergen

Oct 6, 2010, 11:56:06 AM10/6/10
Personally, the more I think about it, the more I'm loving gejyspa's skadei suggestion.  <after typing out a long paragraph with sentences starting with "additionally" and "also" etc... I've opted for bullets>
• It has the sequential nature that a rational logical system should have.
• It's very flexible for different calendars to invent new day words without necessarily conflicting with other calendars by adding more fine grained color words for more days to a week or more broad color words for fewer days.
• It completely avoids the problem that xorxes pointed out of colliding with the Nday long periods system.
• I can't think of anything off the top of my head that would make sense for xundei, et al so not likely to collide with future lujvo.
• Don't need to worry about cmevla vs taking up gismu space vs etc...  All the weekday words under gejyspa's system are canonical form lujvo.
• It's an original piece of lojban culture that isn't merely a copy off of other cultures techniques for naming days (hey imagine that!)
• It's prettier, in my opinion.

### .alyn.post.

Oct 6, 2010, 11:59:34 AM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 12:29:55PM -0300, Jorge Llamb�as wrote:
> > Is there any problem on having a cmene rather than a brivla? After all
> > it's what January is: a name.
>
> It would be much less of a problem if cmevla were syntactically more flexible.
>

xorxes,

Is there a proposal written to make them more flexible? I'm not
current on your proposals, and so I can't tell here if you're
alluding to a proposal that would correct this or if this problem
doesn't yet have a clear solution.

### .alyn.post.

Oct 6, 2010, 12:32:19 PM10/6/10

I was hoping I wasn't going to be the first person to question why
weeks had to have 7 days, or why the Gregorian Calendar was assumed
to be universal.

There are many fascinating proposals regarding calendar reform:

The one that got the most traction was eventually blocked on
religious objections, namely that it didn't have repeating 7-day
cycles:

I've personally wanted to see a marriage of lunar and solar
calendars along a 19-year cycle:

Having said all of this, my own attempts to follow a non-gregorian
calendar, with or without Lojban, has been a struggle in
reconciling any new calendar system with the world's use of the
gregorian calendar.

### Jorge Llambías

Oct 6, 2010, 12:32:52 PM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 12:59 PM, .alyn.post.
<alyn...@lodockikumazvati.org> wrote:
> xorxes,
>
> Is there a proposal written to make them more flexible?  I'm not
> current on your proposals, and so I can't tell here if you're
> alluding to a proposal that would correct this or if this problem
> doesn't yet have a clear solution.

I think it's written somewhere with the rest of the proposals, but
it's very simple, so I can write it here again:

Proposal: Merge CMEVLA with BRIVLA.

In other words, allow CMEVLA to be used exactly in the same places
where BRIVLA can be used.

### .alyn.post.

Oct 6, 2010, 12:44:39 PM10/6/10

.i .ui je'e ki'e mu'o mi'e .alyn.

### Michael Turniansky

Oct 6, 2010, 1:19:49 PM10/6/10

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Luke Bergen <lukea...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Personally, the more I think about it, the more I'm loving gejyspa's skadei
> suggestion.  <after typing out a long paragraph with sentences starting with
> "additionally" and "also" etc... I've opted for bullets>
>
> It has the sequential nature that a rational logical system should have.
> It's very flexible for different calendars to invent new day words
> without necessarily conflicting with other calendars by adding more fine
> grained color words for more days to a week or more broad color words for
> fewer days.

Umm no.  Much as I'm proud that you like my suggestion, that will NOT work, for the same reason as the original question of xorxes (paraphrastically "Isn't it confusing for cultures who use the different numbering schemes?").  If we all agree that today is xundei, then what is 9 days from now?  The 7-day weekers will say "peldei, while the 9-day weekers will say "xundei".  Standards are standard for a reason.  My aim was to establish a standard that doesn't conflict with already existing cultural standards.  And really, is there much variation in week length around the world currently?  It seems that except for the 25 million Igbo's traditional 4 day week, we aren't stepping on many currently-extant calendrical toes here.  And also (I say, tongue-in-cheekily), with the widespread availability of colored printers, monitors and copiers, we can save room in dates by saying, for example Oct 9, 2010 instead of "Wednesday, Oct 9, 2010" :-)

Really, is there anything wrong with universal standards?  That's why we have timezones, airport codes, radio frequency etc. etc.

--gejyspa

### Luke Bergen

Oct 6, 2010, 1:26:51 PM10/6/10
Ok then, remove that one bullet point.  I believe there are still 4 or 5 other fine points (and one subjective one).  If we're going to pick an arbitrary sequence for defining week-day names, why not color?  Are numbers more sequential than colors on a spectrum?  And it avoids the confusion of "5 day time interval" as opposed to "5th day".... and it isn't a cmevla or take up gismu space.

Was your suggestion mostly a joke gejyspa or was there any seriousness to it?

--

### Michael Turniansky

Oct 6, 2010, 1:36:20 PM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Luke Bergen wrote:
Ok then, remove that one bullet point.  I believe there are still 4 or 5 other fine points (and one subjective one).  If we're going to pick an arbitrary sequence for defining week-day names, why not color?  Are numbers more sequential than colors on a spectrum?  And it avoids the confusion of "5 day time interval" as opposed to "5th day".... and it isn't a cmevla or take up gismu space.

Was your suggestion mostly a joke gejyspa or was there any seriousness to it?

As I said in my original message...."Okay, this time, an actually SERIOUS proposal which just occurred to me..."

I really think the idea is great for answering the objections of the previous two systems.
--gy

### Luke Bergen

Oct 6, 2010, 1:44:38 PM10/6/10
Ok, so you were only casting doubt on the one bullet point then.  I thought you were poo-poo-ing the proposal as a whole.  ta'o when does a "suggestion" become a proposal?  ta'onai

### .alyn.post.

Oct 6, 2010, 1:47:37 PM10/6/10
What makes color superior to phonetic ('a', 'e', ...) progression?
What makes color superior to texture (smooth => rough) progression?
What makes color superior to temperature (cold => hot) progression?

Or, in a single question, is color sufficiently arbitrary, or is it
equally arbitrary to other sensation scales? I see your argument of
color vs. numbers, but what is the argument for color vs. other
sensory progression?

-Alan

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 01:26:51PM -0400, Luke Bergen wrote:
> Ok then, remove that one bullet point. I believe there are still 4 or 5
> other fine points (and one subjective one). If we're going to pick an
> arbitrary sequence for defining week-day names, why not color? Are numbers
> more sequential than colors on a spectrum? And it avoids the confusion of
> "5 day time interval" as opposed to "5th day".... and it isn't a cmevla or
> take up gismu space.
> Was your suggestion mostly a joke gejyspa or was there any seriousness to
> it?
>
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Michael Turniansky

> <[1]mturn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Luke Bergen <[2]lukea...@gmail.com>

> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> For more options, visit this group at

>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Lojban Beginners" group.
> To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> For more options, visit this group at
>

> References
>
> 1. mailto:mturn...@gmail.com
> 2. mailto:lukea...@gmail.com

### Michael Turniansky

Oct 6, 2010, 1:51:35 PM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:47 PM, .alyn.post. wrote:
What makes color superior to phonetic ('a', 'e', ...) progression?
What makes color superior to texture (smooth => rough) progression?
What makes color superior to temperature (cold => hot) progression?

Or, in a single question, is color sufficiently arbitrary, or is it
equally arbitrary to other sensation scales?  I see your argument of
color vs. numbers, but what is the argument for color vs. other
sensory progression?

-Alan

Ahhh... but that's the beauty of color, it's NOT a "progression".  It is a circle.  So you don't have one culture saying "it should start on THIS day", and another saying "it should start on THAT day"...

That objection aside, I have no preference for ANY circular, culturally unbiased system.  It was just the first to be suggested, as opposed to number, which have a beginning and end, just like your examples, and "arbitrary" substance/diety naming.

--gejyspa

### Luke Bergen

Oct 6, 2010, 1:54:36 PM10/6/10
Is color circular?  I thought that as you go lower and lower on a spectrum you eventually just dip into wave-lengths that humans can't perceive.  At what point does red get so red that it starts to become green?

Sorry if this is a stupid question.  I hated art class ;)

### .alyn.post.

Oct 6, 2010, 1:55:18 PM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 01:51:35PM -0400, Michael Turniansky wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:47 PM, .alyn.post.
> <[1]alyn...@lodockikumazvati.org> wrote:
>
> What makes color superior to phonetic ('a', 'e', ...) progression?
> What makes color superior to texture (smooth => rough) progression?
> What makes color superior to temperature (cold => hot) progression?
>
> Or, in a single question, is color sufficiently arbitrary, or is it
> equally arbitrary to other sensation scales? I see your argument of
> color vs. numbers, but what is the argument for color vs. other
> sensory progression?
>
> -Alan
>
> Ahhh... but that's the beauty of color, it's NOT a "progression". It is a
> circle. So you don't have one culture saying "it should start on THIS
> day", and another saying "it should start on THAT day"...
> That objection aside, I have no preference for ANY circular, culturally
> unbiased system. It was just the first to be suggested, as opposed to
> number, which have a beginning and end, just like your examples, and
> "arbitrary" substance/diety naming.
> --gejyspa

Ah, I was thinking of color in the sense of "wavelength" rather than
color in the sense of "color wheel."

-Alan

### Lindar

Oct 6, 2010, 2:02:54 PM10/6/10
to Lojban Beginners
detri

^
|
|
|

Now you can all stop arguing.

The day we switch to an obviously better calendar like fixed
international (weeks should start on Monday, that's how they work in
the corporate world, that's how they should be, and frankly I could
give two shits about what the religious people think because half of
them are too loopy to be on board with anything in the first place let
alone Lojban [plenty of offence meant to people that would be offended
by this, none to those who wouldn't be]) is also the day we switch to
dozenal, stop selling cigarettes, forever get rid of the drug problem,
finally feed Africa, and make marijuana legal everywhere.

=D

Stop idealising. Make something that works for the current standard,
then fuck off with your ideals and show us how to use it.

So, back to my point, {li pa lo'o detri} is the first day of the week.
Add {pi} and expand as necessary to week number, month number, year
number, etc. If you want to lujvo it, pavdetri, pavypizyreldetri, etc.

Have fun, and you can thank me later.

### .alyn.post.

Oct 6, 2010, 2:08:51 PM10/6/10

I believe you add {pi'e}, rather than {pi}, as day, week, and month
is not base-10.

### Luke Bergen

Oct 6, 2010, 2:14:44 PM10/6/10
wow, you actually are kind of a prick from time to time.  I took no offence to anything you said but jeeze-oh-man.  Could you get any more... intense?

As far as I can tell, nobody here is being argumentative.  We're having discussions about pros and cons of various systems before we decide on which (if any) should be standard.

Oct 6, 2010, 2:06:12 PM10/6/10
Having given this some thought, I think the fundamental problem is that we're using words that don't have the place structure we want. We're using words that represent durations (like {temci}) instead of coordinates/addresses (like {tcika}). So I humbly (and with great trepedation) propose that we create two additional gismu.  I'll call them {broda} and {brode}, since I don't have the ability to run the algorithm to assign them properly. {broda} is the day of week gismu

broda: x1 is the x2th day of week number x3 of year x4, under calendar/system x5

Similarly, brode is for days of the month (not months themselves), with place structure

brode: x1 is the x2th day of month number x3 of year x3, under calendar/system x5

Then we can say things like "What day of the week is today?" ({le cabdei ma broda}), or "It's October" ({brode fi li pa no}).

Weekdays get very natural lujvo, since {pavbroda} really *is* {broda be li pa}, and both represent Monday (at least, for the zu'i x5). Months, we'd have to convert a little, though, so there might be issues there. Or maybe the x2 place of brode doesn't belong there, and the rest need to be shifted over.

I'm nearly certain that the weekday approach is right. I'd like to see proper fleshing out of the months, but I think starting from here is *much* better than trying to shoehorn things into {djedi} and {masti}.

As a side note, if you really do need to deal with cultures that use different number schemes, you can put something unusual in x5.

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Michael Eaton wrote:
Regardless of whether of not the use of gismu space is allowed, I don't really see any truly compelling reason why it shouldn't. The ability to accurately and clearly define a specific day of the week is a not entirely inconsequential function of language, and, regardless of who you are, it IS a part of your everyday communication. The difference between being able to say 'tuesday', as opposed to having to say 'the day two days after the next day', is not one to be overlooked.

As far as the existing standards for naming / numbering days go, the 'numeric' standard, as rightly pointed out, can cause some syntax issues, though these are slight and not amazingly difficult to work around, while the 'conceptual' standard is rather un-lojban in approach, being far less intuitive than a numbered system.

As for alternatives proposed in this very thread, would you really rather use, for instance, a fairly wieldy lujvo for so simple a concept as days of the week?

I'm not saying that days of the week SHOULD take up gismu space, nor am I saying that they will, I'm merely pointing out that the alternatives come with their own problems, and the use of gismu space would hardly be the travesty it is being made out to be.

-----Original Message-----
Sent: 06 October 2010 09:30
To: Lojban Beginners
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: A suggestion for the Lojban names of
weekdays and months.

Either way, the point still stands. xorxes' proposal is likely to
continue to be ignored. Your proposal to take up eight places in gismu
space for days of the week will be shot down. Unless you can format
your argument entirely in very understandable Lojban, you're not going
to get even one word into gismu space. It's just not going to happen.

So, you can either go with my suggestion, use the current standard, or
go with something like what selkik has proposed in another thread.
That's pretty much what you're down to.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginne...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.

http://www.blackpool.gov.uk/EmailDisclaimer/
This message has been scanned for inappropriate or malicious content as part of the Council's e-mail and Internet policies.

http://www.blackpool.gov.uk/EmailDisclaimer/
This message has been scanned for inappropriate or malicious content as part of the Council's e-mail and Internet policies.

******************************************************************************See the Blackpool You Tube video aimed at attracting French visitors by clicking this link http://www.visitblackpool.com/jetaime ******************************************************************************

### .alyn.post.

Oct 6, 2010, 2:22:19 PM10/6/10
I'm conflicted by this message as well. Lindar's e-mail is very close
to going into my killfile, though the content of his messages is
very good.

Reading them, however, sometimes makes my day worse.

Lindar, I really really enjoy listening to your ideas and I get a
lot of out them. I struggle some days to read past the tone of your
e-mail, and that struggle is getting closer to my acting on it by
filtering your e-mail out of my inbox. I would really rather not do
this. I request that you separate your proposals and suggestions from
judgement or dismissiveness of other ideas. Your proposals are
strong enough to stand on their own merit.

-Alan

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 02:14:44PM -0400, Luke Bergen wrote:
> wow, you actually are kind of a prick from time to time. I took no offence
> to anything you said but jeeze-oh-man. Could you get any more... intense?
> As far as I can tell, nobody here is being argumentative. We're having
> discussions about pros and cons of various systems before we decide on
> which (if any) should be standard.
>

> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Lindar <[1]lindar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> detri
>
> ^
> |
> |
> |
>
> Now you can all stop arguing.
>
> The day we switch to an obviously better calendar like fixed
> international (weeks should start on Monday, that's how they work in
> the corporate world, that's how they should be, and frankly I could
> give two shits about what the religious people think because half of
> them are too loopy to be on board with anything in the first place let
> alone Lojban [plenty of offence meant to people that would be offended
> by this, none to those who wouldn't be]) is also the day we switch to
> dozenal, stop selling cigarettes, forever get rid of the drug problem,
> finally feed Africa, and make marijuana legal everywhere.
>
> =D
>
> Stop idealising. Make something that works for the current standard,
> then fuck off with your ideals and show us how to use it.
>
> So, back to my point, {li pa lo'o detri} is the first day of the week.
> Add {pi} and expand as necessary to week number, month number, year
> number, etc. If you want to lujvo it, pavdetri, pavypizyreldetri, etc.
>
> Have fun, and you can thank me later.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
> To post to this group, send email to

> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> For more options, visit this group at

>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Lojban Beginners" group.
> To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> For more options, visit this group at
>

> References
>
> 1. mailto:lindar...@yahoo.com

### Remo Dentato

Oct 6, 2010, 2:26:50 PM10/6/10
2010/10/6 Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com>:

> I think it's written somewhere with the rest of the proposals, but
> it's very simple, so I can write it here again:
>
> Proposal: Merge CMEVLA with BRIVLA.
>
> In other words, allow CMEVLA to be used exactly in the same places
> where BRIVLA can be used.

I like it but would this mean that {.alis.} would have the meaning
of "x1 is named Alice"?

If this is the case, how would {le} and {lo} work? Would {le .alis.}
be the same as {la .alis.} ?

### Michael Turniansky

Oct 6, 2010, 2:46:49 PM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 2:22 PM, .alyn.post. wrote:
I'm conflicted by this message as well.  Lindar's e-mail is very close
to going into my killfile, though the content of his messages is
very good.

Reading them, however, sometimes makes my day worse.

Lindar, I really really enjoy listening to your ideas and I get a
lot of out them.  I struggle some days to read past the tone of your
e-mail, and that struggle is getting closer to my acting on it by
filtering your e-mail out of my inbox.  I would really rather not do
this.  I request that you separate your proposals and suggestions from
judgement or dismissiveness of other ideas.  Your proposals are
strong enough to stand on their own merit.

-Alan

la'e di'u cu krinu lo du'u la lindar  se cmene zo lindar .i lo notci be fi ly. cu gasnu lo nu so'a da djica lo nu vlile darxi ly. lo linsi kei .e lo nu jai bapli lo nu ly darno da

--gejyspa

### Jorge Llambías

Oct 6, 2010, 3:45:44 PM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Adam Lopresto <adamlo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> broda: x1 is the x2th day of week number x3 of year x4, under
> calendar/system x5
> brode: x1 is the x2th day of month number x3 of year x3, under
> calendar/system x5

That makes a lot of sense.

> Months, we'd
> have to convert a little, though, so there might be issues there.

Yeah, I don't think that brode could be the basis for month names,

> Or maybe
> the x2 place of brode doesn't belong there, and the rest need to be shifted
> over.

brodi: x1 is the x2th month of year x3, under calendar/system x4

> I'm nearly certain that the weekday approach is right. I'd like to see
> proper fleshing out of the months, but I think starting from here is *much*
> better than trying to shoehorn things into {djedi} and {masti}.

I agree.

### Jorge Llambías

Oct 6, 2010, 3:49:39 PM10/6/10
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Remo Dentato <rden...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/10/6 Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com>:

>>
>> In other words, allow CMEVLA to be used exactly in the same places
>> where BRIVLA can be used.
>
> I like it but would this mean that  {.alis.}  would have the meaning
> of "x1 is named Alice"?

Basically, yes. (Probably not the case for every cmevla, but that
would be the basic case for ordinary names.)

> If this is the case, how would {le} and {lo} work? Would {le .alis.}
> be the same as {la .alis.} ?

Only to the same extent that "le me la .alis." is the same as "la .alis."
(i.e. not really, but the difference is quite subtle).