Letters simulation by lojban vision!

[la ki'es-di'es]

coi

 

every thing can simulate the all, so, one of lojban go can to simulate the strange letters which mostley used within cmene, I think there two version of letter, slight or heavy, we can express the slight by small letter while the heavy we can expressing by capital letter, so may make new letters by simulate other languages.

 

e.g. to talk french r will use R within written while to talk english r will use r within written  while to talk italian r will use rr within written, and so on...

 

co'o

la'o mu"ymmyd-nurr byrruk

[la ki'es-di'es]

I will to provide lojban team by all letters possibilites as I imagine, soonly, in addition to their searches

[Jonathan Jones]

Isn't that what the IPA is for?
 

co'o

la'o mu"ymmyd-nurr byrruk

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/eMx7HMf0koEJ.
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.

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

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

[la ki'es-di'es]

Greeting,

 

I was very busy last period...

 

In fact I discussed the subject much but there is some difference and a lot of benefits.

 

I send previously file about that but may need some improvement.

 

We must realizes this fact, that there is two type of knowledge:

 

(1) depened on the person itself can improve by intelligence exercises, and be for accidental events and its rules attempet to deal an infinity random events almost.

(2) depened on people expereince in life you can't obtain it by yourself you will learn that continiously from others and we called it the wisdom and usualy attempt to take all probabilities.

 

Every one have a lot to talk and every thing extend to infinity.

 

e.g: may R italian is the inverse of r english but french r is the inverse of like A in arabic word Ali, and so on we should take all probabilities.

 

la'o mu''ymyd-nuuR byRuk

[Jonathan Jones]

Again. Isn't that what the IPA is for?

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/HeXNJJZv8ToJ.

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.

[Jonathan Jones]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Adam Chevalier <chevali...@gmail.com> wrote:

The IPA is confusing and most people looking at it won't know how to read it.

However, I do not advocate the creation of another standard notation. Either way, its one more thing someone must learn before learning lojban.

You don't need to know the IPA to learn Lojban.
 

The simpler the learning of lojban is the better.

As it stands, prospective jbopre must obtain some sense of predicate logic before lojban makes any sense (and the current learning materials make no effort to help people who do not have a background in math or CS to learn these concepts).

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/RlFl5_3TiF8J.

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.

[Ian Johnson]

Indeed, as a speaker of English you already know the vast majority of the sounds. Here are the issues that I know of that an English speaker might encounter:
Your vowels are probably not perfect. Nonetheless, Lojban has very few vowels, so this probably will not be a practical problem.
{x} is very foreign. Even after learning how to make it on its own, getting used to clusters with it is difficult.
{j} is a little bit foreign, but really not that hard to get used to, especially if you can internalize that our "j" is {dj}.
Your {r}, if it is an approximant, as is usually the case for American English speakers, will probably be a problem. On its own it's fine, the problem is in clusters. For example {tr} can turn into {tcr} and {dr} can turn into {djr} if {r} is an approximant.
Several of the clusters are foreign, for example {ml}, {zd}, {jb}, etc. Buffer vowels can help with this.

Otherwise Lojban doesn't sound that much different from English, which means you really don't need to know anything about IPA to learn it.

mu'o mi'e la latro'a

[Ian Johnson]

Have you looked at http://www.lojban.org/tiki/wavelessonscontinued , which is now the recommended learning material? While I had a background in predicate logic before coming to Lojban, I find your claim to be patently false. In particular I find that even the CLL, which is a very poor learning material in the first place, assumes no background in predicate logic, even though it would be somewhat easier to read that way. The WLC is far better in this regard, albeit a little bit incomplete.

mu'o mi'e la latro'a

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Adam Chevalier <chevali...@gmail.com> wrote:

The IPA is confusing and most people looking at it won't know how to read it.

However, I do not advocate the creation of another standard notation. Either way, its one more thing someone must learn before learning lojban.

The simpler the learning of lojban is the better.

As it stands, prospective jbopre must obtain some sense of predicate logic before lojban makes any sense (and the current learning materials make no effort to help people who do not have a background in math or CS to learn these concepts).

On Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:52:06 AM UTC-6, aionys wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/RlFl5_3TiF8J.

[Alex Rozenshteyn]

Yeah, it's not Ithkuil zo'o

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

          Alex R