[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Lojban Names.
- To: John Cowan <cowan@snark.thyrsus.com>
- Subject: Re: Lojban Names.
- From: cbmvax!uunet!mullian.ee.mu.oz.au!nsn
- Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1992 18:11:48 +1000
- In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 14 Mar 92 09:20:08 GMT." <9203141433.AA08937@relay1.UU.NET>
- Reply-To: cbmvax!uunet!mullian.ee.mu.oz.au!nsn
- Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!pucc.princeton.edu!LOJBAN>
Quoth Ivan.
>how about this:
> {la'o .ing. New York .ing. goi la badyplis.}
> {la'o .ing. Margaret Thatcher .ing. goi la tirnim.}
Hehe. In fact, there is nothing essentially wrong about this. Whether this
will become standard naming procedure is not for me to judge...
>and then, of course, you may assign a KOhA, which means end of trouble.
In fact, Lojbab's note on the introduction of a rafsi for {fo'a} (fo'a goi la
suomis. i le fo'arselsanga - A finnish song) strongly pushes towards such a
treatment.
>If you're looking for people who have never heard of latitude and
>longitude, New York might be a good place to go...
Without wishing to enter into what might just develop into a John vs. Ivan
situation: touch'e, messir! :)
Nick, who went with "o = e and "u = i because of Greek transliteration.
Hm. "o = e, "u = i? Though the form {tirki,e} sits very uncomfortably with
this Greek, I could live with it. On the other hand, I could also live with
{osteraix}.
Yes, ultimately this *is* all very silly, so if someone else wants to decide
a standard lojbanising phoneticisation, let them.
Snoperias. Now *that*'s funny.
OK then. The point of the standardised Lojbanisations (which, of course, noone
is obligated to use) is to be:
Consistent with orthodox Lojban phonology & morphology (no sg medials)
Not glico
Preferably related to the "native" form, preferably in a consistent manner
(for example, I'm assuming, by the place structure of {natmi} and {gugde},
that the name of the nation, rather than the name of the nation-member, is
to be used (frans, not franSEZ. rosi,a, not ruskii. [the cultural gismu
are another matter]. madiaroSAG, not madiar.)
Though taken to its natural conclusion this process is madness, and though
our Lojban reader will require good examples of the use of {la'o}, nonetheless
such standardised Lojbanisations are required, partly for the reasons Lojbab
has argued, partly for normalisation. *If* this accepted, then one starts
asking about the details. ESteraix or OSteraix? makedonia or makeDOni,a or
makeDOni,ia (I read the phonology guide as saying that, between two vowels,
, means a glide; that's why I omitted it.
Still, I'm keeping my mouth shut until things seem clearer to me; right now
they don't at all.