Talk:Lojban

Constructed languages B‑class Top‑importance

	Constructed languages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Constructed languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of constructed languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Constructed languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languagesTemplate:WikiProject Constructed languagesconstructed language articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

August 2007

Summary:
Proposals/Suggestions

Grammar

Alice In Wonderland

how is it possible to translate Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland into a language which has an aim to eliminate ambiguity in lexis and grammar?

that's the reason artificial languages are so successful... or aren't they?

no they aren't LOL.

Pronouncing the comma

I've got the following from the on-line Reference Grammar, Chapter 3, Section 3, eighth paragraph:

"It is always legal to use the apostrophe (IPA [h]) sound in pronouncing a comma."

-- Dissident (Talk) 18:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I discussed it with the author of that book, and he says it should probably be considered an erratum. I'll keep this talk page apprised on any further developments.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 00:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the comma rather pronounced as a glide (between vowels)?? As I had learned it, the apostrophe (comma above right) can be pronounced as IPA [h] but any kind of "unvoiced fricative" is allowed also. I for one never could imagine why a glottal stop or such couldn't do the job as well. (It is said to be paramount to not complicate things for people unable to articulate the H-sound, e.g. for Italians). Yet, I'll have a look into my The Complete Lojban Language. Wayasu (talk) 19:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The glottal stop is reserved for the . character, as an alternative to an outright pause. Jozis. (talk) 15:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Apostrophe" and "comma" refer to very different things in this context. Apostrophe (') and comma (,). Apostrophe can be pronounced as any unvoiced fricative that isn't already the sound of some other letter—you wouldn't want it to be the same sound as "f" or "s", for example. The glottal stop is one of the valid pronunciations for "." and, therefore, it is not correct to use the same sound for the apostrophe.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 21:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sapir-Whorf

The description said that Lojban was designed to test the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis - such a description can be contradicted by reading given information on this very Wikipedia article. Lojban, from what I understand, was designed to be a usable Loglan, which would make its purpose very different. It does not seem to have one specific goal in mind, but various - an international auxiliary language being a more optimistic goal.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.90.164.4 (talk • contribs) 10:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC1)

Brivla

"All brivla, except for a handful of borrowings such as alga, have at least five letters."
The five letter rule is about the subcategory of gismu, alga is clearly a fu'ivla.
Codegrinder 21:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surely fu'ivla are a type (albeit a rare one) of brivla? Jozis. (talk) 15:08, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional logo

I suggest that the logo proposed by Eppcott and cizra [1] (the one on which the favicon of Lojban.org is based) is introduced in addition to the main logo on the top of the article. I think it's one of the common and best graphic representations of Lojban. --Mednak 16:43, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't propose it, I like the original more. I just recreated the image using nicer SVG. --Cizra

Would you upload it? --Mednak 11:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my!!

It is uggly! Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 14:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? --Mednak 11:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The current Latin orthography of Lojban is indeed somewhat jarring, due to the non-standard use of the full stop, the comma and capital letters. I feel that this needs to be addressed by the Lojban community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jozis. (talk • contribs) 15:09, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for not killing me. In the Swedish wikipedia I would have been dead by now. Beware of their smiling faces, any misstep, and You're dead! Said: Rursus (☻) 10:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox add-on

A dedicated Lojban popup dictionary as a Firefox add-on has been suggested, but is still in the level of speculation as the present lexing and parsing system of Lojban does not cover JavaScript.

I'm not familiar with Lojban, but this sentence seems very odd. It seems to be saying that the reason a specialised Lojban dictionary add-on cannot be made is because there are no JavaScript-based parsing tools for Lojban. Actually that's a guess; taking it at face value it seems to be saying the opposite - that Lojban can't parse JavaScript.

On top of that confusion, I've never heard of a dictionary that does anything more complicated than conjugate or decline words into their possible lemmas, so why would a lack of parsing libraries stop development of a dictionary?--holizz 17:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Internet Section addition

Webcomic "xkcd" did a strip on Lojban - http://xkcd.com/191/ The title tag of the image (viewable by hovering the mouse over it) reveals the phrase "zo'o ta jitfa .i .e'o xu do pendo mi". I have not the slightest idea what this means. 58.7.212.229 12:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[humor] that-there is-false [.] [request] [is-it-true?] you befriend me

In natural English, "Just kidding; I don't mean it. Please don't hate me?" 218.111.47.55 02:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Series of Lojban articles?

Given that there's a series of articles for Esperanto, including Esperanto as an international language, Esperanto vocabulary, and Esperanto and Ido compared, should similar articles be made for Lojban? 69.80.147.216 16:25, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it can be compared to other languages other than log-langs, and there are comparissions in this article, but they would be a stub by themselves —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.135.156.71 (talk) 03:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding entry for Commons:Babel

Has anyone considered adding an entry for Commons:Babel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Erth64net (talk • contribs) 21:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pixra's photograph/illustration merging

Photograph actually can be produced by using kacmyxra (obtained from Lojban's site) or by using the phrase ¨(the photo) PIXRA (of ---) (took by ---) LE KACMA. Of course, neither PIXRA nor KACMA may be capitalized —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.135.156.71 (talk) 03:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

phoneme, allophone

"Lojban is rather defined by the phonemes (spoken form of words)" (Orthography)
"The sounds may be allophoned." (Phonology)

These sentences show serious misunderstanding of the meaning and usage of these linguistic terms. --Thnidu (talk) 02:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think both passages are wrong on usage but correct on intended sense. The first passage is saying that Lojban has no single correct orthography—any orthography that unambiguously represents the underlying morphemes is equally correct. The latter is saying that the Lojban phonemes include a nontrivial number of allophones. Both of these assertions are correct. They should be reworded.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 02:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Others" section

Why? writing The Lord's Prayer & making the article feels like a religious preach, instead of making it more benifitial to write a sample for the declaration of human rights :( --Mahmudmasri (talk) 19:22, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you make a good point. Translations of the Lord's Prayer have traditionally been used in Western countries for language comparison, because the New Testament of the Bible is so widely translated. This has become and old-fashioned tradition and is no longer seen as having religious implications. However, the use of Christian religious material might well seem jarring to people from other parts of the world. Given Lojban's stated purpose of general cultural neutrality, I think that is definitely a bad thing.

An additional issue is that the current version of the Lord's Prayer included here contains some archaisms (it dates, I believe, to the early 90s) which are not considered to be grammatically correct now. There will be a new version of the Lord's Prayer available in the near future, but I would suggest that we should go ahead and remove the prayer from this article right away. As a replacement language sample, we can use the Lojban version of "The North Wind and the Sun".—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 03:42, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, http://www.omniglot.com uses, for the most part, article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, maybe that would be an alternative? 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 06:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Lojbanisms"?

"Some unique Lojbanic expressions", couldn't that be called "Lojbanisms" by the current rules of English? Said: Rursus (☻) 10:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Auxiliary?

Although Lojban could be used as an auxiliary language, that is neither its main intent nor its proper classification. So why is section five entitled "Comparison with other auxiliary languages"? Should it not be "Comparison with other constructed languages"? I am going to go ahead and change this. --n-k, 17:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While we're fixing this, I've refined it to "Comparison with other logical languages", since (unless I've overlooked something) all of the languages it's compared to are loglangs. Pi zero (talk) 17:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge section 4.1 and external links?

Section 4.1 contains a list of links which probably belong in the external links section. Should they be moved? --N-k, 16:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison to Ilaksh

I noticed that there is no comparison with Ilaksh. Is there anyone here with the knowledge to compare the two?AndreasBWagner (talk) 21:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]