le la kalevalas. jbofitpla

[cbmvax!uunet!mullian.ee.mu.oz.au!nsn]

Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 12:17:36 BST
Reply-To: Ivan A Derzhanski <iad@COGSCI.ED.AC.UK>
>>  Date:        Wed, 19 Aug 1992 20:57:37 +1000
>>  From: nsn@AU.OZ.MU.EE.MULLIAN

>>  I think we should still keep the one
>>  manager and five rotating staff, though.
>I don't see why we need the staff to be rotating.  That's not how
>coffeehouses in the real world are anyway.

Mmm... OK, don't have 'em rotating *shrug*. Cuts the numbers down to five.

>>  The names will have to be native Lojban (rafsi): I propose
>I don't get what you propose, but maybe I like it.  (Or maybe I don't.  :-))
{.u'isai.u'uru'e mi pu nalmorji lenu cusku lei se stidi cmene}. We could have
{cic.} ("Wildman"), {cis.} ("Hot Pants"), {cit.} ("Kid"), {ciz.} ("Wierdo"),
{dar.} ("Daredevil"), {dib.} ("Darl"), {din.} ("Moneybag"), {dir.} ("Mr.
Kibbitz"), {duk.} ("Worrywart"), {fad.} ("Norm"), {fad.} ("Mr Attitude"),
{faz.} ("Dennis the Menace"), {fun./xaufun.} ("Lucky") (these are all #3
names, eh?) --- or for less unsavoury, {sax.} ("Harmonia"), {glek.}
("Felicia"), {vir.} ("Carl"), {nol.} ("Adolf"), {tir.} ("Ferris")...

>>  Actually, I was thinking sexual minorities. I expect we can also assume
>>  homophobia to have been eradicated in Lojbanistan.
>Now I'm going to milxe disagree.  We aren't going to break all
>existing conventions at once, are we?

I apologise for what was a throwaway point. However, our background characters,
even if neutral, need not be characterless. I certainly *hope* I'm not
suggesting that gay=interesting, straight=bland (an attitude which disses
both); rather, in a boisterous environment like #2, given we've taken out
the cultural differences, I'd prefer it if the boisterousness were sustained
by some heterogeneity amongst the cafe personnel. I won't insist on this,
in any case...

>>  Neutral, yes, but not characterless. Exploring stylistic stereotypes (the
>>  sledgehammer JL15 I'm prone to) should be fun.
>This will lead to all the attention being put into their respective
>speech habits, and none left for the contents of the stories.  I vote nay.

Weeeell, er, um...if it's a vote, I'll abstain.

Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 09:57:17 -0400
From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject:      lemi malfri

>Hey!  Good to see you again, Dave (*hug*.  What has a hug to do with
>bisexuality, Nick?)

Ah, not bisexuality, Mark; soc.bi, which has been rather obsessive about
passing out "*hug*"s and "*e-nibble*"s :)

>I think {ca le pasobinomei nanca} would work better:  the year you describe
>(by Western conventions) to be the 1980th.

You mean {le pasobinomoi nanca}, which happens to match the Russian standard
(actually, the Russian standard is {le binomoi nanca}, but that's not very
Lojbanic.) The Lojban standard until now has been {la pasobinonan.} (nan for
nanca).

>Who's Pat?  It took me a second to work that out.  You *CANNOT* assume that
>names made from rafsi will be interpreted as having anything to do with the
>rafsi.

*shrug* It worked for me...

>{lemi kumfa noi mi denpa} is a little too vague for my taste: "My room
>which-incidentally-is-such-that: I wait".

Actually, I rather liked it. Of course, the title should be {lemi malselfri}.

Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 10:21:47 -0400
From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU>

>>Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 09:36:48 BST
>>From: Ivan A Derzhanski <iad%COGSCI.ED.AC.UK@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
>>>  Date:        Wed, 19 Aug 1992 18:20:18 +1000
>>>  From: nsn@AU.OZ.MU.EE.MULLIAN
>Yeah.  Remember, guys, these are the *background* characters.  It'd be fine
>to give them some flavor and all, but don't think they're the only ones
>around, nor the key ones (except perhaps in some rare "Cook's Tale" or
>something).

Oh, ok. Still, these'll be the people we come home to in every episode; they
do have to be "character actors". It seems I missed the point of these
characters, nevertheless, for which I duly apologise.

Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 10:34:32 -0400
From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU>

>I'm going to be repeating myself a lot in these responses.  Cope.

Mate, I'm *born* to cope *chuckle* :)

>>Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 20:57:37 +1000
>>From: nsn%MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

>Yeah, keep them neutral.  I don't think you have to go out of your way to
>try to convince me they're native lojbananas

Well, while I want them to be boisterously different from each other, I also
want them to have common reference points --- I want them, as a mass, to
provide a feeling of home (Lojbanistan?) against which the protagonists
are foregrounded. Of course, since we don't know what being a native lojbani
would entail, we can't exaggerate this.

>I *like* the
>idea of giving them distinct, but distinctly lojbanic, speaking styles, BUT
>perhaps it would be better not to go too carefully this route

Well, best is to keep it subtle (not *whack* *whack* zo'u *VSO*); since
that'll take a lot of finesse (which I'm not sure I have), we might as well
play this one down. Still, a vague guideline (this character prefers tanru,
this one expands) won't hurt overmuch.

>If you want someone with
>orientation X, have him/her/it/them walk in the front door, under the
>climbing axes.  If you feel a need to attach that kind of info to a staff
>member, make sure nobody has beaten you to it, and then think twice before
>doing it.

Yeah, that's the best way to handle it; wilco.

>Remember, though,
>that when you tweak the background or the staff, you're messing with
>something that *all* the writers have to live with.  Don't build your world
>and force everyone else to live in it; bring your world into everyone
>else's.

OK, I won't mess with what's there, but I would like something reasonably
explicit there to build on. I *am* going to describe a particular crack in
a wall :)

Thanks for bringing spaceship la nitcion. back to Earth, Mark :)

Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 10:39:24 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU>

>ni'ota'o doi nitcion. pau do snada xu te mrilu lemi kardu la .iisra'EL.?

.i go'icai doi mark. i mi mo'u te mrilu le kardu cazi le djedi poi do di'a
cmima le mriste ca ke'a .i mi pu plagau fo lenu frati ckire do .iku'i.u'u
leni mi cutyzu'e cu dukse fi lenu mi snada go'i .i le karda cu li'a mutce
pluka mi gi'e jibni le karda poi mi te mrilu fi la .iVAN. la lndn. ku'o...
fizo'ezo'o no'uzo'onai tu'a le kajna po mi

Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:34:53 BST
Reply-To: Ivan A Derzhanski <iad@COGSCI.ED.AC.UK>
.>  From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@EDU.COLUMBIA.CTR>
.>  >From: Ivan A Derzhanski <iad%COGSCI.ED.AC.UK@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
.>  >>  From: nsn@AU.OZ.MU.EE.MULLIAN
.>  >>  Ivan writes (btw, welcome back;
.>  >Welfound.  (I mean, _kalws se brhka_.)
._kalws se brhka_ `well I found thee [here]'.
.I must say I wish there were an English
.equivalent - I'm always at a horrible loss when someone says "Welcome"
.or "Welcome back" to me.  I just need some equally standardised
.formula to reply, and none is available.

And a Lojban equivalent? (NO, Lojbab, leave those unallocated cmavo alooone! :)
It would be the same, I fancy, as "You're welcome" in response to "Thank you";
I don't think it'd be too rude for it to be {je'e} ("Roger").

If someone would like to start organising Cafe Lojban's decor now... :)

---
'Dera me xhama t"e larm"e,	      T  Nick Nicholas, EE & CS, Melbourne Uni
 Dera mbas blerimit		      |  nsn@munagin.ee.mu.oz.au (IRC: Nicxjo)
 Me xhama t"e larm"e!		      |  Milaw ki ellhnika/Esperanto parolata/
 Lumtunia nuk ka ngjyra tjera.'	      |  mi ka'e tavla bau la lojban. je'uru'e
 - Martin Camaj, _Nj"e Shp'i e Vetme_ |                *d'oh!*