------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Proto-Languages Question (reply to rob haden)
From: Elliott Lash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. ."
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Re: Contemporaneous protolanguages
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Biblical Hebrew or Modern Hebrew?
From: David H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. Babel text?
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: Novel ConGrammar
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: X-Sampa question - the H\ and h\ issue.
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: Babel text?
From: taliesin the storyteller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: Biblical Hebrew or Modern Hebrew?
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. ."
From: Keith Gaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Re: CHAT: When is an Apache not an apache? (was: When is a class not a class?)
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. Re: "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
From: Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14. Re: "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam ? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
From: Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15. Commercial Concalendar
From: Jeffrey Henning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16. Re: Arabic Questions
From: David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17. LLL Weekly Update #12/2004
From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18. Fwd: Re: OOPs!! When is a class not a class? (Re:
Number/Specificality/Archetypes in Language)
From: Philippe Caquant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19. Re: Commercial Concalendar
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20. Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. ."
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21. Re: Biblical Hebrew or Modern Hebrew?
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22. Re: Novel ConGrammar
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23. Re: Arabic Questions
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24. Re: "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
From: Keith Gaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25. Re: "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 09:23:07 -0700
From: Elliott Lash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Proto-Languages Question (reply to rob haden)
--- Rob Haden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"He gave sharp swords and broad shields to the
> hero"
>
> I think it should be "heroes," since you gloss the
> word as a plural below.
Yes, you're right.
> >Hinession:
> >Nâ v’asan n’herchein nechver ha rhesein cas penos
> da
> >lâroeu
>
> It seems like Hinession underwent a second shift in
> vocabulary.
Well, only a bit.
The "new words" are:
nechver "sharp"
It's from Northern Nindic: nechber "painful"
ha "and" From N. Nindic hai/ha "also, in addition"
penos "towards"
From N. Nindic peno/penos "across, over towards"
da "the" From Archaic N. Nindic ta/da "the, that, that
one"
All the rest is derived from the words you see in the
following Classical Nindic example, with minor sound
changes and grammatical changes.
asan "giving" from N. Nindic athan "giving", gerund
of ethi "to give", seen in "ethed"
rhesein "shields" from N. Nindic rhedd "shields" with
an analogical -ein plural ending, which became more
used in Hinession.
> >Cl. Nindic:
> >Ethed naw herchín ethaen ‘bo rhedd cath noth i
> laerwy
>
> It seems that both Cl. Nindic and Hinession actually
> preserve accusative *-
> n. With Cl. Nindic 'rhedd', perhaps the development
> was *rhredn > *rhedd.
> Does 'naw'/'nâ' mean "he"?
The accusative was definitely lost. Classic Nindic
"rhedd" is pronounced /rED/, the <dd> representing a
fricative derived by intervocalic lenition of the
stop. If the final "n" of the accusative was
preserved, the final vowel would have been preserved:
*rodajn > rodi:n > ro"Di:n > rEDi: > rEDi <reddi>
*rodaj > rodi: > ro"Di > rED <redd>
The -ein of Hinession <rhesein> comes from the
Classic Nindic -ín plural ending which was greatly
extended in Hinession and later Classic Nindic. It is
from *-ajna, a Common Nindic collective formation.
> >Silindion:
> >Anelë kiréin sampi rondeimma kasta i lairohyanu
>
> I don't see how 'rondeimma' can be from
> *rodnoin-naj.
Well, that's because it's not. <rondeimma> is a
Silindion inovation that did not exist in Silic. It is
the commitative case plural of <rondo> It is derived
from the accusative *rodnoin plus the clitic -ma
"with". It's only used when two nouns are being
linked.
> >Essamea:
> >Nelsi kiree sikkie nee rendee kasta sinjänu läirejä
>
> How can -kk- arise from -pn-?
It can't. <sikkie> is a new word, derived from Silic
*sikkije "fast" Basically like, "fast witted, sharp
witted, sharp, smart" etc. etc. *sapni would become
**sämpe in Essamea.
> >Nindic:
> >*anta-ti: (o:) sjarski-j itt-ani: emopod roda-j
> kasta
> >give-pst (he) sword-pl bite-prp. and shield-pl
> broad
> >
> >nods je la:jros-ja
> >unto the hero-pl
>
> If the original genitive was *-di, perhaps 'emopod'
> preserves it?
No, these Nindic and Silic sentences show no sound
changes whatsoever. The sound changes happen a bit
after these examples I guess. They're kind of like
idealized versions of what Nindic and Silic would look
like, if they had preserved everything about the
proto-language's phonology. *emopod "and" comes from
*eme + *opod "on top, in addition" etc.
The> dative preposition 'nods' seems to be able to be
> analyzed as *nod-s.
> Presumably, this metathesized to *nost giving
> Classical Nindic 'noth'.
Something like this. You're essentially correct. *nods
comes from *nod + s, "s" being the zero-grade of *es
"in"
The
> word for "sword" seems to contain an additional -ski
> element.
Yes, *syarski is the root *SYAR* "strike" with an
instrument derivative suffix.
>
> One correspondence between Silic and Nindic seems to
> be S si(:) : N ti(:),
> implying assibilation in Silic.
The problem with that analyses being that, as I said
before, the Silic and Nindic sentences I gave were
only changed in regard to vocab and grammar not sound.
-ti: and -si: occur both in Silic and Nindic. The
distribution seems to originally have been -si: after
consonant roots, -ti: after vowel roots. This may have
been one morphem at one time, but that time was
pre-Proto-Silinestic, not after it's break up.
Another one is S ki
> : N sja, implying that
> earlier *ki became palatalized with lowering and
> centralizing of vowel
> quality, giving *kja, and then eventually became
> *sja (cf. Indo-Aryan from
> Indo-European).
I dont know where you're seeing this one.
It's possible that N -ani: in
> 'ittani:' and S -ni (?)
> in 'sapni' are related.
Yes, the -ni: is an adjectival derivation. In Nindic
ittani: it is added to a verbal noun in -a, giving a
sort of participle. Which exists in Silic as well as
-ani:.
The -ni of *sapni ought to be long. Here it is added
to a nominal root, with no real verbal significance,
hence it's just a regular adjective.
Perhaps the roots *itt-
> (source for geminate?) and
> *sap- mean "bite" and "cut," respectively.
Right...well, *itt means "prick" and *sap is related
to thorns and what not.
c.f. Silindion <finto> "pine-tree" *sp-it-mo
>From a zero-vowel grade variant of *sap.
The
> biggest problem is actually
> the verb: Nindic points to *anta-, while Silic
> points to *nel-. I'm not
> sure how these two can be related, besides both
> containing an /n/.
They're probably related distantly, in some
pre-Proto-Silinestic way.
Alot of roots in Silinestic seem to have related
sounds and semantics.
*bur "weave"
*buk "spider"
*nol "cold"
*not "snow"
and others that I can't remember right now.
Anyways.. the roots were:
*anta "give"
*ne(l) "give"
Probably from a Primitive Nestic root: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@
or something.
Anyways, thanks for your analyses. I enjoyed it.
Elliott
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:48:17 +0200
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. ."
On Sep 27, 2004, at 6:38 PM, Peter Bleackley wrote:
> Staving Carsten Becker:
>> Hey!
>> I've just got an email on the address I only use for the list with the
>> title "Sorunsuz Yaşamanın Keyfi" by bilgi at kutsandanismanlik dot
>> com.
>> Because since recently I get one or two spam mails/day on that
>> address,
>> I know that I must be careful on that address, too, with opening
>> mails.
>> So has someone of you sent this mail? If this is spam (Can I open it
>> fearlessly on my Linux box?), which language might this be? Hungarian
>> again?! Though there's a thorn in there, that would not fit Hungarian.
> I got that as well. I was wondering if it might be Icelandic, but
> there was
> a c-cedilla in there, which doesn't seem to fit. It didn't appear to be
> sent to the list, and after a quick inspection, I discarded the
> hypothesis
> that it might be a newbie's Babel text. So into the spam bin it went.
> Pete
I also got it. Looks like mis-encoded Turkish to me.
-Stephen (Steg), who gets too much spam.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:59:08 +0200
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Contemporaneous protolanguages
On Sep 27, 2004, at 7:13 PM, Rodlox wrote:
> *looks at a map* I myself'd go along this route:
> Red Sea ->
> Cole-Syria (that spit of land linking Egypt to Arabia & Palestine) ->
> Mediterranean (sailboat or at least a raft) ->
> home of the Sumerians.
> would that work?
Coele-Syria, if i remember correctly, *is*
Palestine/Israel/Canaan/etc., as well as Lebanon (i.e. pretty much the
whole Levant area). It's a Greek name meaning something like "Hollow
Syria", referring to the northern non-oceanic part of the African-Asian
Rift.
The spit of land you're thinking of is probably the Sinai peninsula.
The Sumerians lived in what's now Kuwait (at least if any of it wasn't
underwater at the time) and southern Iraq.
-Stephen (Steg)
"Jordan is a magical misty mystical wonderland!"
~ the effects of Dead Sea haze
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:20:31 -0400
From: David H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Biblical Hebrew or Modern Hebrew?
Hello. I have been wondering which of these languages would be better to
learn first.
I hope to obtain a good (if not fluent) knowledge of Modern Hebrew some
day, and I would also like to be able to read the Tanakh in its original
Hebrew. But which would be better to learn first, would learning Biblical
Hebrew make it easier to learn Modern Hebrew since a lot of the grammar
and vocabulary are the same, or the other way round?
Thanks
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 20:29:34 +0200
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Babel text?
http://www.langmaker.com/db/bbl_saohghikh.htm
is it any good? *curious*
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:04:19 +0100
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Novel ConGrammar
On Monday, September 27, 2004, at 12:38 , Rodlox wrote:
> inspired by an actual archeological object.
>
> This language appears to be SVOn (subject-verb-object-number), in which
> the
> number can be an actual number, or simply "possession of (#)".
SVO i understand. But what does 'number' relate to? By position it would
seem to imply it relates to the object. Does this mean that only the
object can be singular or plural and/or can be possessed? Is the subject
always ambiguous as regards number? Clarification please.
>
> constanants:
> -sk- [s][k]
> -pth- [pT]
There must surely be other consonants than these (I assume you mean
'consonants' and not 'constants'). The hyphens each side presumably denote
that these are medial clusters. Are they the only ones? Or if these are
the only ones attested on the archaeological fragment, how do we know the
pronunciations at all?
Is there any significance in that -sk- is given as [s][k] (separately)
while -pth- is given as [pT]. In short, what are we being told about the
consonants of the languages & what has this got to do with _grammar_?
> vowels:
> (optional vowels do not change the word by their presence or absense in
> the
> written word's meaning;
So what is the purpose of these 'optional vowels'? Are we talking about
optional epenthetic vowels, such as the second [I] that occurs in some
people's pronunciation of _film_ as ['fIlIm], while most say [fIlm]?
> obligatory vowels do change the word's meaning by
> their presence or absense).
Nothing remarkable here. It happens in English _cat_ and _cut_ and in
French _dos_ and _des_.
> optional vowels:
> -au- [2]
> -ou- [
> -a- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What is the sound of |ou|
> obligatory vowels:
> -e [E]
> -ee (long |e| sound)
do you mean [e:] (as in german _Beet_) or [i:] (as in English _beet_)?
> -hi [h][I]
Is this meant to be a consonant+vowel comb, as [h][I] suggests, or an
aspirated vowel? In any case, a solitary occurrence
among the vowel inventory seems a bit odd.
> -u [3]
If the hyphens mean anything, and I assume they do, then it would seem:
- no initial vowels occur;
- only three medial vowels occur, and these are optional with no effect on
meaning;
- four final vowels occur, one of which is aspirated. These are not
optional and different vowel will give a word a different meaning.
Also, it appears the languages has only front and central vowels and lacks
back vowels entirely.
> tenses:
> definate past (that which can be remembered)
> indefinate past (beyond memory's reach)
> present (definate & indefinate?)
I don't understand the third one: present (definite & indefinite?). Could
you explain?
> indefinate future (farther than one can think)
> definate future (fore-sight & planning)
I fail to see how the future can ever be definite. Foresight & planning
can do much to increase the likelihood of a situation - but it can never
be definite.
Exactly what is this archaeological fragment? It seems to be very scant on
some features, for example the consonant inventory, but can apparently
give use complete picture of the tense system. How can this be?
> [now to see if there's a response this time].
Yep - there is ;)
Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===============================================
Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods
as of the reason." [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:04:12 +0100
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: X-Sampa question - the H\ and h\ issue.
On Monday, September 27, 2004, at 12:32 , Rodlox wrote:
> what are the differences between [h\]
voiced glottal fricative, denoted in IPA by 'hooktop h' ɦ. It is in fact
quite a common sound in natlands. Some of my fellow countrymen that still
pronounce /h/ have this sound in works like _behind, ahead_ etc. The |h|
of Czech I am told is this sound.
> and [H\] ? ..
voiceless epiglottal fricative, denoted in IPA by a small capital H.
Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===============================================
Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods
as of the reason." [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 20:19:01 +0200
From: taliesin the storyteller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Babel text?
* Rodlox said on 2004-09-27 20:29:34 +0200
> http://www.langmaker.com/db/bbl_saohghikh.htm
"make brick from mud" -> "mud gave past tense, brick received"
Neat!
t.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 20:19:01 +0200
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Biblical Hebrew or Modern Hebrew?
On Sep 27, 2004, at 8:20 PM, David H wrote:
> Hello. I have been wondering which of these languages would be better
> to
> learn first.
> I hope to obtain a good (if not fluent) knowledge of Modern Hebrew some
> day, and I would also like to be able to read the Tanakh in its
> original
> Hebrew. But which would be better to learn first, would learning
> Biblical
> Hebrew make it easier to learn Modern Hebrew since a lot of the grammar
> and vocabulary are the same, or the other way round?
> Thanks
I'm not sure, sorry. I learned both of them concurrently, so i don't
know which is better to learn first. But whichever you choose, make
sure you start out reading with vowels, and then learn how to read
without them. Because once you know how to read with them, you can
easily learn how to read without - but if you first learn without
vowels, reading vowelled texts can completely mess you up.
It also depends which is more of an immediate goal - do you want to
visit Israel, or read the Tanakh?
-Stephen (Steg)
"prophets have visions; politicians have none."
~ yair zakovitch
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:39:20 +0100
From: Keith Gaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. ."
Steg Belsky wrote:
> I also got it. Looks like mis-encoded Turkish to me.
I agree. I'm after getting it and it looked like total junk. Switched
the encoding in Thunderbird to Central European, and Turkish popped up.
Not only is it mis-encoded, there's no encoding at all! The muppet!
Still, it looked cool.
K.
--
Keith Gaughan -- talideon.com
The man who removes a mountain begins
by carrying away small stones...
...to make place for some really big nukes!
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:32:44 -0400
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: CHAT: When is an Apache not an apache? (was: When is a class not a class?)
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 11:52:38AM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> The worst social mortification my wife ever experienced (before my
> time, at least), was when she was invited by letter to "An Apache Party"
> and came dressed as an Apache rather than as un(e) apache.
> The latter sense is first recorded (in French) in 1902, so she had
> history on her side -- but to no avail.
So what is "un(e) apache"?
-Marcos
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:59:45 -0400
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 07:39:20PM +0100, Keith Gaughan wrote:
> I'm after getting it
I know this came up before, but I don't recall - is that an English
dialectism or a translated non-Englishism? (In my 'lect, "I'm after X"
can only mean "I'm out to get X", "I want X", not "I've just gotten X")
-Marcos
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 21:25:34 +0200
From: Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:59:45 -0400, Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 07:39:20PM +0100, Keith Gaughan wrote:
> > I'm after getting it
>
> I know this came up before, but I don't recall - is that an English
> dialectism or a translated non-Englishism?
I believe this is a typical feature of Hiberno-English; the influence
is from Irish grammar.
So you could say it's both: it derives from a non-English language but
is a standard feature of an English dialect/group of dialects.
Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Watch the Reply-To!
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 21:28:59 +0200
From: Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam ? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 21:25:34 +0200, Philip Newton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
["I'm after VERB-ing"]
> I believe this is a typical feature of Hiberno-English; the influence
> is from Irish grammar.
See, for example, a Google search for "I'm after" Hiberno-English
, which will produce a variety of interesting matches (
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22I%27m+after%22+Hiberno-English ).
Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Watch the Reply-To!
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:31:16 -0400
From: Jeffrey Henning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Commercial Concalendar
True story:
I have a large Dutch company that has its own calendar. We wrote some
custom software for them that includes this calendar, and today they called
me because it needs a change: 2005 is a leap year for them! Normally, they
mark off the weeks from 1A to 13D, making thirteen four-week "months" in a
year. They do certain projects for their customers each "month", meaning
they get to charge for 13 projects a year instead of 12.
Alas, when we customized our software for them, they neglected to inform us
that every four years they need to insert a leap week: Week 1E! Otherwise
their project year gets out of sync with their fiscal year. So we need to
modify our validation to handle this leap week.
My hat is off to whoever got paid to design this concalendar, though his or
her choice in week names was uninspired.
Best regards,
Jeffrey
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:44:09 EDT
From: David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Arabic Questions
J. wrote:
<<I understand that [j] and [w] are the same as [i_^] and [u_^] (so that [j]
will have a slight friction since [i] has some friction). So you're saying
that [?\] is the same as [A_^]? That's interesting and matches quite well
what my ears have perceived.>>
This is what I was taught in phonetics.
<<Voiceless glottal? I think this was about voiced pharyngeal. ??>>
Someone had said that *my* description was that of a voiced [h], or [h\].
I was trying to show that it wasn't, and conjecturing about how one might
have come to that conclusion.
<<Maybe your misunderstanding is based on you two having different notions of
the open back unrounded vowel [A], that is, Christian might think of it
having in mind the Züritüütsch example, while David might think of it
having in mind the English example. I'm not accusing anyone of being
unaware that the IPA/X-SAMPA/CXS vowels are intended to be describe
absolute qualities, but I just think we can't help being conditioned by our
native languages.>>
I don't follow. Can you explain more? :)
-David
*******************************************************************
"sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."
-Jim Morrison
http://dedalvs.free.fr/
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 22:04:31 +0200
From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: LLL Weekly Update #12/2004
Hallo!
And another week has passed, during which 1 (one) message was posted
to the lostlangs list. It was from Bob and about the copula and
negation in Hifahoshach.
Greetings,
Jörg.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 22:00:47 +0200
From: Philippe Caquant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Fwd: Re: OOPs!! When is a class not a class? (Re:
Number/Specificality/Archetypes in Language)
Forgot to look at the "reply to" address... Jeg sender
videre...
>
> --- Pablo Flores <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> skrev:
>
> > If you do "a + b" and you don't know what type of
> > value you put into those variables, that's a
> problem
> > with your program, not with the operator. :)
> >
> > I agree that a good programming language should
> > not be as paternalistic as to assume that, when
> you
> > wrote '2' + '2', you actually meant 2 + 2...
> >
> I didn't fancy the problem. See what Our Beloved
> David
> Flanagan says in the Holy Book, chapter 11, section
> "Converting objects into primary values" (my
> regrettable re-translation):
>
> "However, there are some [places ?] in JavaScript
> where the context is ambiguous ! [please note the
> exclamation mark] The operator + and the comparison
> operators (<, <=, > and >=) operate both on numbers
> and strings, so that, when an object is used with
> one
> of those operators, it is difficult [please not the
> adjective: difficult] to say whether it should be
> converted into a number or a string. In most cases,
> JavaScript first tries [please note: most cases, and
> tries] to convert the object by calling its method
> valueOf(). If this method returns a value (usually
> [please note: usually] a number], this value is
> used.
> However, in most of cases valueOf() simply returns
> the
> object without conversion [interesting !]; in that
> case, JavaScript then tries [tries] to convert the
> object into a string by calling its method
> toString().
>
> (Skipping next paragraph: if the object is a date,
> it
> still works another way)
>
> Most of objects have no valueOf() returning useful
> results. When you use an object with the operator +,
> you usually get a string concatenation rather than
> an
> addition (snip)
>
> If you defined a valueOf() method returning a
> number,
> you can use arithmetic operators, or others, on that
> object, but adding your object to a string might
> bring
> an unexpected behaviour: the toString() method is
> not
> called any more, and a string representation of the
> number returned by valueOf() is concatenated to the
> string" [aaaargh]
>
> So, is it a string ? is it a number ? is it a bird
> or
> is it a plane ? Seems hard to say. And if David
> Flanagan, Lord of JavaScript and Graduated of the
> MIT,
> uses such words as "difficult", "ambiguous",
> "usually", "try" and "unexpected", so who am I,
> miserable worm, to contest His Words ? Nothing at
> all.
>
> (Of course, I would not try to write something like
> 'x
> = "aaa" + "bbb"' in a Pick Basic program. I just
> explained how Pick Basic would handle it. Usually,
> it
> would rather be 'x = a + b', where a and b might
> happen to be strings, for ex if you confused the
> decimal point with the (French) decimal comma. If a
> contains 2,35 and b contains 1,10 this is correct in
> French but not in Basic, except if you redefined,
> etc,
> etc...)
> -----
> Said John Cowan:
>
> "It's a matter of point of view. If you conceive of
> concatenation
> as "string addition" (in the same way that we
> conceive
> of integer
> and floating-point addition as being "the same
> thing",
> though to the
> CPU they are utterly different), then it makes sense
> to use the same
> operator for them. But if you conceive of
> concatenation and addition
> as two different things, it makes sense to use two
> different operators."
>
> I agree. To me, these are completely different
> concepts and there is no reason to use the same
> symbol
> for both, except maybe that there wasn't any common
> symbol at hand any more, which would be a very bad
> reason indeed.
>
> "I've always liked Ada's solution for & and | vs. &&
> and
> ||.
> Ada uses keywords rather than symbols in most
> situations, and so writes
> "and" and "or" for the simple operators; the
> relationship of the
> shortcut
> operators to conditionals is explicitly recognized
> by
> writing "and
> then"
> and "or else", and this makes a handy way to read &&
> and || out loud in
> C-derived languages."
>
> I don't know Ada, but this looks nice. My idea was
> to
> represent all operator concepts by 3-char mnemonics,
> like "ADD" for Addition, "CCT" for concatenating,
> etc... well, looks rather much like Assembler,
> doesn't
> it ? So you could write programs using these codes,
> and then a processor would translate it into Cobol,
> Pascal, JavaScript or whatever. (Probably too
> simple,
> there must be some problem somewhere).
>
> --------
> Said Keith Gaughan:
>
> Keith Gaughan:
>
> "Don't know much about Pick BASIC, but it's probably
> completely untyped."
>
> It is.
>
> "JavaScript objects are all typed, and variables
> gain
> a type when you do
> an assignment. That way, it doesn't get mixed up
> when
> you're doing
> concatenation or addition."
>
> (See above)
>
> "I don't know if you've heard of it, but the
> language
> Tcl similarly to
> how you've described Pick BASIC, treating everything
> as a string."
>
> Well, TCL is used on Pick Systems. It's more or less
> at the same level as SQL on other systems. There is
> also something very unfriendly called "PROC",
> allowing
> you to write scripts. PROC is the worst part of Pick
> Systems. But I cannot see that Pick Basic "treats
> everything like a string" - or maybe you mean that
> it
> parses the value before trying to do some arithmetic
> operation on it ?
>
> "The use of ":" for concatenation is very unusual!"
>
> I think it was more common earlier. ":" is also used
> (by Pick) in the PRINT instruction:
>
> PRINT "BONJOUR":
> will print the word without a linefeed after it,
> while:
> PRINT "BONJOUR"
> will send a linefeed after the string. And it is not
> so stupid, because there seem to be more cases where
> you would be happy to get the linefeed without
> having
> to add "\n" or other esoteric codes than the
> contrary.
>
> ( ";" is used to separate instructions on a same
> line,
> but no Pick instruction has to be ended by ";", or
> ".", or whatever)
>
> --------
> (To John Cowan):
> "Apache" means "malfaiteur, bandit" in French (and
> also "Apache", of course), but this sounds a little
> outdated by now. Anyway, I guess it's not
> politically
> correct at all.
>
>
> =====
> Philippe Caquant
>
>
> Ceterum censeo *vi* esse oblitterandum (Me).
>
=====
Philippe Caquant
Ceterum censeo *vi* esse oblitterandum (Me).
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 16:06:59 -0400
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Commercial Concalendar
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 03:31:16PM -0400, Jeffrey Henning wrote:
> Alas, when we customized our software for them, they neglected to inform us
> that every four years they need to insert a leap week: Week 1E! Otherwise
> their project year gets out of sync with their fiscal year. So we need to
> modify our validation to handle this leap week.
Are you sure it's every four years? A leap week every four years is too
often; to keep in synch with the tropical year leap weeks need to
happen between 5 and 6 years apart.
I would guess that under the covers they are using the ISO calendar,
which just numbers the weeks 1-52 or 53 without breaking it up into any
sort of "month". The leap-week schedule is somewhat uneven because
it's actually based on the Gregorian calendar: week 1 is always the
first week that contains at least 4 days in January (no more than 3 in
December). There is a leap year (a year with a "week 53") whenever
there are 53 instead of 52 weeks between consecutive "week 1"s.
-Marcos
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 22:59:31 +0300
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. ."
Keith Gaughan wrote:
> I agree. I'm after getting it and it looked like total junk. Switched
> the encoding in Thunderbird to Central European, and Turkish popped up.
>
> Not only is it mis-encoded, there's no encoding at all! The muppet!
If you switch to Turkish encoding (Latin-5), it will be clear that it is
Turkish.
And it is spam spam spam:
sorun-suz yashama-nIn kefy-i
problem-DEPR.ADJ life-POSS joy-3SG
Rough translation: "Joy of life without problems".
How good that I gathered some Turkic material for my P20 (Kuman Tyli)
project :))
---------------------
Carsten Becker wrote:
> So has someone of you sent this mail?
Definitely not me.
-- Yitzik
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 23:05:06 +0300
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Biblical Hebrew or Modern Hebrew?
Katav Steg Belski:
> On Sep 27, 2004, at 8:20 PM, David H wrote:
> > Hello. I have been wondering which of these languages would be better
> > to
> > learn first.
> > I hope to obtain a good (if not fluent) knowledge of Modern Hebrew some
> > day, and I would also like to be able to read the Tanakh in its
> > original
> > Hebrew. But which would be better to learn first, would learning
> > Biblical
> > Hebrew make it easier to learn Modern Hebrew since a lot of the grammar
> > and vocabulary are the same, or the other way round?
> > Thanks
>
>
> I'm not sure, sorry. I learned both of them concurrently, so i don't
> know which is better to learn first. But whichever you choose, make
> sure you start out reading with vowels, and then learn how to read
> without them. Because once you know how to read with them, you can
> easily learn how to read without - but if you first learn without
> vowels, reading vowelled texts can completely mess you up.
> It also depends which is more of an immediate goal - do you want to
> visit Israel, or read the Tanakh?
I learnt some Modern Hebrew first, and it was a mistake. To switch from BHe
to MnHe is much easier. But anyway, all I can say is "I agree 100% with
Steg", esp. about vowels. And finally, it depends on your immediate goal.
-- Yitzik who teaches BHe to some rather lazy guys in a certain institution
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 23:36:52 +0200
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Novel ConGrammar
hopefully, this isn't #6.
> > inspired by an actual archeological object.
> >
> > This language appears to be SVOn (subject-verb-object-number), in which
> > the
> > number can be an actual number, or simply "possession of (#)".
>
> SVO i understand. But what does 'number' relate to?
the number of something - it automatically is shunted to the end of the
sentance, regardless of which category it otherwise would have been in).
> By position it would
> seem to imply it relates to the object. Does this mean that only the
> object can be singular or plural and/or can be possessed?
yep. (unless the subject is a group of people who possess eight carrots).
> Is the subject
> always ambiguous as regards number? Clarification please.
> > vowels:
> > (optional vowels do not change the word by their presence or absense in
> > the
> > written word's meaning;
>
> So what is the purpose of these 'optional vowels'? Are we talking about
> optional epenthetic vowels, such as the second [I] that occurs in some
> people's pronunciation of _film_ as ['fIlIm], while most say [fIlm]?
it would be like, if _film_ could be written _FLM_...and you would know
that the _i_, being an optional vowel, fit there.
(of course, that would cause _FLM_ in the glossary to not allow any other
optional vowels).
> > optional vowels:
> > -au- [2]
> > -ou- [
> > -a- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> What is the sound of |ou|
I'll fill that in, just after I finish reading over the latest X-SAMPA site
I was directed to.
:)
> > obligatory vowels:
> > -e [E]
> > -ee (long |e| sound)
> do you mean [e:] (as in german _Beet_) or [i:] (as in English _beet_)?
English _beet_.
> > -hi [h][I]
> Is this meant to be a consonant+vowel comb, as [h][I] suggests, or an
> aspirated vowel? In any case, a solitary occurrence
> among the vowel inventory seems a bit odd.
it's a Work in Progress.
> > tenses:
> > definate past (that which can be remembered)
> > indefinate past (beyond memory's reach)
> > present (definate & indefinate?)
>
> I don't understand the third one: present (definite & indefinite?). Could
> you explain?
I wasn't sure if there'd be one Present tense (both of them), or two
Present tenses.
> > indefinate future (farther than one can think)
> > definate future (fore-sight & planning)
>
> I fail to see how the future can ever be definite. Foresight & planning
> can do much to increase the likelihood of a situation - but it can never
> be definite.
the heat death of the universe, is an example of a definite future event.
> Exactly what is this archaeological fragment?
a block from Chatalhoyuk.
> It seems to be very scant on
> some features, for example the consonant inventory,
WIP.
> but can apparently
> give use complete picture of the tense system. How can this be?
because I'm basing a conlang on an otherwise unknown language. :)
> > [now to see if there's a response this time].
>
> Yep - there is ;)
*cheering*
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 23:09:18 +0300
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Arabic Questions
J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:
> Would this mean that there can be a three way distinction: /?/ - /?\/ -
/0/?
Why not? At least /?/ ~ /?\/ opposition is pretty common in Semitic lgs,
e.g. BHe ["?ajin] 'there is no' vs. ["?\ajin] 'eye'.
-- Yitzik
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 22:08:54 +0100
From: Keith Gaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 07:39:20PM +0100, Keith Gaughan wrote:
>
>>I'm after getting it
>
> I know this came up before, but I don't recall - is that an English
> dialectism or a translated non-Englishism? (In my 'lect, "I'm after X"
> can only mean "I'm out to get X", "I want X", not "I've just gotten X")
You know, you just don't notice your own dialectism when you're typing.
Be assured, I'm quite fluent in English and have spoken it since I was a
wee child. If you pay really good attention to what I write, you'll
probably notice that I've a tendancy to slip back into Sligo
Hiberno-English, so I do.
What you picked out is a pretty salient example of the dialect. The
adverb 'after' is used to modify the sentence to a near-past perfect
tense when used with the present continuous. It does other effects when
used in with the future, e.g. 'you'd/'ll be after a drink, won't you?',
meaning 'Do you want a drink?'. I think this crops up in some british
dialects, but I'm not sure which.
The meaning comes from the use of the phrase 'tar eis' (these days
written by some as 'tareis', but that looks terrible and Irish is rarely
their first language when they do), meaning... no, guess! Yup, 'after'.
The Hiberno-English usage is identical to the one in Gaelic, all forms.
The meaning you mentioned would be understood, but we wouldn't use it
here.
K.
P.S. You mission, if you choose to accept it, is to pick out some other
dialectisms in the above text.
--
Keith Gaughan -- talideon.com
The man who removes a mountain begins
by carrying away small stones...
...to make place for some really big nukes!
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 22:19:22 +0100
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "I'm after ..." (Re: Maybe Spam? "Sorunsuz Yathamanın Kefyi .. .")
Keith Gaughan wrote:
> Mark J. Reed wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 07:39:20PM +0100, Keith Gaughan wrote:
>>
>>> I'm after getting it
>>
>>
>> I know this came up before, but I don't recall - is that an English
>> dialectism or a translated non-Englishism? (In my 'lect, "I'm after X"
>> can only mean "I'm out to get X", "I want X", not "I've just gotten X")
>
>
> You know, you just don't notice your own dialectism when you're typing.
>
> Be assured, I'm quite fluent in English and have spoken it since I was a
> wee child. If you pay really good attention to what I write, you'll
> probably notice that I've a tendancy to slip back into Sligo
> Hiberno-English, so I do.
>
Sligo, eh? I used to live in Leitrim (Drumshanbo, to be exact). Not
too far. Used to go shopping in Sligo. But that was a long time ago,
back when I was around 7.
> What you picked out is a pretty salient example of the dialect. The
> adverb 'after' is used to modify the sentence to a near-past perfect
> tense when used with the present continuous. It does other effects when
> used in with the future, e.g. 'you'd/'ll be after a drink, won't you?',
> meaning 'Do you want a drink?'. I think this crops up in some british
> dialects, but I'm not sure which.
'You'll be after a drink' is a different construction, though - since
'after a drink' means 'wanting a drink', in British English, anyway.
Though the 'will be' is different - the future seems to be used to a
greater extent in Hiberno-English than British English. I suspect I
probably use it more than the average Englishman, however.
>
> The meaning comes from the use of the phrase 'tar eis' (these days
> written by some as 'tareis', but that looks terrible and Irish is rarely
> their first language when they do), meaning... no, guess! Yup, 'after'.
> The Hiberno-English usage is identical to the one in Gaelic, all forms.
>
Welsh, too. 'Rydw i wedi gwneud' - 'I have done' - 'Am I after doing'.
> The meaning you mentioned would be understood, but we wouldn't use it
> here.
>
> K.
>
> P.S. You mission, if you choose to accept it, is to pick out some other
> dialectisms in the above text.
>
'fraid I couldn't spot any - apart from 'wee'. But I speak British
English, spent two years living in Ireland, and have an Irish
grandfather. So I might just be adapted to it.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
