Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [worldlanglist] A way to get rid of R

Expand Messages
  • risto@kupsala.net
    ... Don t worry. I built up the vocabulary anew in a few weeks before and after announcing the continual of Pandunia s development. Working fast is not a
    Message 1 of 7 , Mar 28 12:26 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Steve Rice wrote:
      > On 3/27/12, risto@... <risto@...> wrote:
      >> Steve Rice wrote:
      >>> On 3/25/12, Risto Kupsala wrote:
      >>> I have no problem with Pandunia's phonology, though I was surprised to
      >>> see both /l/ and /r/.
      >>
      >> The only way to excuse it was to accept Pinyin <r> as a variant
      >> pronunciation. Maybe <r> shouldn't be there, after all. Even in some
      >> Western languages it has transformed beyond recognition. French and
      >> Brazilian Portuguese <r> are in fact closer to /x/, which probably made
      >> Jens to merge /r/ with /h/ in Neo Patwa! It is easier to stack evidence
      >> against <r> than for it.
      >
      > I mentioned that earlier. No one knows how to pronounce <r>. If I see
      > a text in an unknown language, I'm willing to guess at the
      > pronunciation of a lot of letters, but r, c, j, q, and x aren't among
      > them. Unfortunately, by bringing this up, I think I may have set back
      > the Pandunia lexicon by a year or more, which is precisely not what I
      > wanted.

      Don't worry. I built up the vocabulary anew in a few weeks before and
      after announcing the continual of Pandunia's development. Working fast is
      not a problem for me, but having any time at all is. I'm writing even this
      email at work, which is not good but maybe the only chance today.

      I already checked and there aren't many words with <r>. I have
      intentionally kept it out from the core vocabulary. Unfortunately I just
      added -ri suffix. I don't think there is a way to make derivatives like
      doktari, mantari, masteri and lideri to work with a different suffix, so
      they shall head to the thrash bin.

      >>> I'm just concerned with stability, especially in
      >>> the lexicon. The lesson vocabulary and the lexicon disagree in places,
      >>> and that's not good. You also need a way to add words that works
      >>> faster than the Ido top-down committee model.
      >>>
      >>> But that may be a problem of the more ambitious worldlangs. LdP at
      >>> least has a method for generating needed vocabulary before senility
      >>> sets in and you forget what you were trying to say in the first place.
      >>> That's a good model, and one of LdP's clear advantages at the moment.
      >>
      >> It is impossible to make a word selection algorithm for Pandunia because
      >> of the quotas. Pandunia is to be globally balanced and the quotas are
      >> the
      >> way to guarantee it.
      >
      > Then it neither is nor ever can be a real language. Real languages are
      > constantly being destroyed and recreated by their users, resulting in
      > lexical, semantic, and grammatical change. The quotas you're talking
      > about will prevent this, because the normal changes born of normal use
      > will interfere with the quotas: people will coin words. You can't stop
      > them.

      It's a different matter, a different stage in the language's life. The
      initial lexicon, that I am working with currently, shall be globally
      balanced. What happens afterwards is out of my control, but at least I
      have set a model that welcomes loan words from everywhere.

      > So Pandunia's word selection will continue with the
      >> top-down model. The speakers are free to coin compound words, which is
      >> very important as the root lexicon is meant to be relatively small in
      >> any case.
      >
      > That only works if you can somehow keep Pandunia from becoming a
      > full-fledged language--if you can freeze it at a roughly pidgin-like
      > stage and avoid creolization. Otherwise the vocabulary will naturally
      > increase. Even if you intend Pandunia to be a very limited use
      > artifact, some users will decide to translate literature into it or
      > produce their own, and the vocabulary will expand.

      A committee can work real fast now, in the Internet Age. You can submit
      your proposal to the international committee and you will get the official
      stamp in a few days. That should be fast enough.

      Just start submitting your proposals of new words to me now. Please
      remember to add sufficient evidence why you think the word is
      international (in some part(s) of the world) and needs to be added.

      > Are there any living, successful languages that operate top down? I
      > can't think of any, despite various academies that vainly try to
      > regulate their respective languages. That's a strong argument that
      > Pandunia won't be the first.

      We don't need total control. We only need to make sure that Pandunia
      dictionaries that will be used in different parts of the world will be in
      harmony with each other.

      -- Risto
    • Stephen Rice
      ... I ll pretend to find this encouraging. ... Well, so long as I didn t disrupt anything, then... ... LdP already has that without quotas. So does NP. ...
      Message 2 of 7 , Mar 28 11:48 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        On 3/28/12, risto@... <risto@...> wrote:
        > Steve Rice wrote:
        >> On 3/27/12, risto@... <risto@...> wrote:
        >>> Steve Rice wrote:
        >>>> On 3/25/12, Risto Kupsala wrote:

        >> Unfortunately, by bringing this up, I think I may have set back
        >> the Pandunia lexicon by a year or more, which is precisely not what I
        >> wanted.
        >
        > Don't worry. I built up the vocabulary anew in a few weeks before and
        > after announcing the continual of Pandunia's development. Working fast is
        > not a problem for me, but having any time at all is. I'm writing even this
        > email at work, which is not good but maybe the only chance today.

        I'll pretend to find this encouraging.

        > I already checked and there aren't many words with <r>. I have
        > intentionally kept it out from the core vocabulary. Unfortunately I just
        > added -ri suffix. I don't think there is a way to make derivatives like
        > doktari, mantari, masteri and lideri to work with a different suffix, so
        > they shall head to the thrash bin.

        Well, so long as I didn't disrupt anything, then...

        >>> It is impossible to make a word selection algorithm for Pandunia because
        >>> of the quotas. Pandunia is to be globally balanced and the quotas are
        >>> the
        >>> way to guarantee it.
        >>
        >> Then it neither is nor ever can be a real language. Real languages are
        >> constantly being destroyed and recreated by their users, resulting in
        >> lexical, semantic, and grammatical change. The quotas you're talking
        >> about will prevent this, because the normal changes born of normal use
        >> will interfere with the quotas: people will coin words. You can't stop
        >> them.
        >
        > It's a different matter, a different stage in the language's life. The
        > initial lexicon, that I am working with currently, shall be globally
        > balanced. What happens afterwards is out of my control, but at least I
        > have set a model that welcomes loan words from everywhere.

        LdP already has that without quotas. So does NP.

        >> So Pandunia's word selection will continue with the
        >>> top-down model. The speakers are free to coin compound words, which is
        >>> very important as the root lexicon is meant to be relatively small in
        >>> any case.
        >>
        >> That only works if you can somehow keep Pandunia from becoming a
        >> full-fledged language--if you can freeze it at a roughly pidgin-like
        >> stage and avoid creolization. Otherwise the vocabulary will naturally
        >> increase. Even if you intend Pandunia to be a very limited use
        >> artifact, some users will decide to translate literature into it or
        >> produce their own, and the vocabulary will expand.
        >
        > A committee can work real fast now, in the Internet Age.

        Roughly equivalent to "Government is becoming more efficient."
        Meaning: My doctor really needs to adjust my psychotropic medications.

        You can submit
        > your proposal to the international committee and you will get the official
        > stamp in a few days. That should be fast enough.

        For conversation? For affixing a note to someone's Facebook wall?
        Other things have sped up in the Internet Age too. But this begs the
        question of where the "international committee" comes from. It's
        probably better to plan for an autonomous movement.
        >
        > Just start submitting your proposals of new words to me now. Please
        > remember to add sufficient evidence why you think the word is
        > international (in some part(s) of the world) and needs to be added.

        Well, let's see: to resolve the conflict between "da" in the lessons
        (= "give") and "da" in the lexicon (= 10), I've suggested keeping "da
        = give" and substituting "ten" for 10. International? It's used in 54
        countries worldwide and in in global aviation. One or two billion
        people will recognize it. And it fits the requirement for a
        monosyllable with the form CV(n). Problem solved!

        >> Are there any living, successful languages that operate top down? I
        >> can't think of any, despite various academies that vainly try to
        >> regulate their respective languages. That's a strong argument that
        >> Pandunia won't be the first.
        >
        > We don't need total control. We only need to make sure that Pandunia
        > dictionaries that will be used in different parts of the world will be in
        > harmony with each other.

        Good luck: the lesson vocabularies and the lexicon don't even agree now.

        Pandunia has great potential, but chaining it up won't help it succeed.

        Steve
      • Risto Kupsala
        ... In informal situations you are free to use whatever word you think that your listener/reader would or should understand. But you shouldn t just coin words
        Message 3 of 7 , Mar 28 2:05 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          28.3.2012 21:48, Stephen Rice kirjoitti:
          > On 3/28/12, risto@...<risto@...> wrote:
          >
          >> A committee can work real fast now, in the Internet Age.
          > Roughly equivalent to "Government is becoming more efficient."
          > Meaning: My doctor really needs to adjust my psychotropic medications.
          >
          > You can submit
          >> your proposal to the international committee and you will get the official
          >> stamp in a few days. That should be fast enough.
          > For conversation? For affixing a note to someone's Facebook wall?
          > Other things have sped up in the Internet Age too. But this begs the
          > question of where the "international committee" comes from. It's
          > probably better to plan for an autonomous movement.

          In informal situations you are free to use whatever word you think that
          your listener/reader would or should understand. But you shouldn't just
          coin words anytime anywhere and assume that the rest of us will adopt
          them. They have to be made official sooner or later. The bottom-up
          approach is slower than the top-down approach if your goal is to get the
          words into wider use.

          >> Just start submitting your proposals of new words to me now. Please
          >> remember to add sufficient evidence why you think the word is
          >> international (in some part(s) of the world) and needs to be added.
          > Well, let's see: to resolve the conflict between "da" in the lessons
          > (= "give") and "da" in the lexicon (= 10), I've suggested keeping "da
          > = give" and substituting "ten" for 10. International? It's used in 54
          > countries worldwide and in in global aviation. One or two billion
          > people will recognize it. And it fits the requirement for a
          > monosyllable with the form CV(n). Problem solved!

          Thanks. Next time propose a non-Western word. Remember the quotas, you
          know... ;)

          >
          >>> Are there any living, successful languages that operate top down? I
          >>> can't think of any, despite various academies that vainly try to
          >>> regulate their respective languages. That's a strong argument that
          >>> Pandunia won't be the first.
          >> We don't need total control. We only need to make sure that Pandunia
          >> dictionaries that will be used in different parts of the world will be in
          >> harmony with each other.
          > Good luck: the lesson vocabularies and the lexicon don't even agree now.

          I corrected 10=ten. Were there also other disagreements? I don't
          remember seeing any except "da = to give" is missing from the dictionary.)

          > Pandunia has great potential, but chaining it up won't help it succeed.

          I still haven't taught the beast good manners. I will unchain him or her
          when he or she is ready to take over the world.

          --
          Risto Kupsala

          Pandunia - a cross-cultural IAL
          http://www.kupsala.net/risto/pandunia/
        • Stephen Rice
          ... What if I don t care? The goal is communication, not winning a lexical popularity contest. Consider how Esperanto works: there is a process for
          Message 4 of 7 , Mar 28 11:37 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            On 3/28/12, Risto Kupsala <risto@...> wrote:

            > In informal situations you are free to use whatever word you think that
            > your listener/reader would or should understand. But you shouldn't just
            > coin words anytime anywhere and assume that the rest of us will adopt
            > them. They have to be made official sooner or later. The bottom-up
            > approach is slower than the top-down approach if your goal is to get the
            > words into wider use.

            What if I don't care? The goal is communication, not winning a lexical
            popularity contest. Consider how Esperanto works: there is a process
            for officializing words, but it essentially means recognizing what
            everyone else already takes for granted. For example, "Usono" (US) had
            been in common use for about a century before it was recognized as
            official. The Idists wouldn't do that: they would feel obliged to
            stick an asterisk on the poor neologism in place of a scarlet letter.

            Now, anyone who has read newspapers or magazines knows how to
            introduce a neologism; we see it done in articles where a technical or
            regional term occurs that the writer thinks needs explanation.

            "He became interested in boyagi, a Korean traditional wrapping cloth..."

            "Bishops said the teaching was essentially Nestorian, that is, it held
            that Christ had two separate natures, one human and one divine."

            And so on. In a translation, a footnote (in print) or a mouse-over
            note (in hypertext) can present a gloss.

            >> Good luck: the lesson vocabularies and the lexicon don't even agree now.
            >
            > I corrected 10=ten. Were there also other disagreements? I don't
            > remember seeing any except "da = to give" is missing from the dictionary.)

            I'll check. If there are, I'll mention it privately; this isn't the
            proper place for that, and I wouldn't have mentioned the topic but for
            frustration.

            Steve
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.