Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> 
> I think with the absurd preponderance of FLOSS proponents saying "free
> as in freedom!" the term "free software" really cannot be interpreted
> as anything *but* FLOSS anymore.  Frankly I'm sick of hearing "free as
> in freedom!" and "libre!" all the goddamn time, I know what is meant
> :P

From the Reddit thread:

    drayno 5 points 6 days ago

    Anyone here actually use D for real work? I've always thought
    it looked well architected, like a better C++, but it seems
    hampered by the lack of a complete correct FREE
    implementation.

    WalterBright 5 points 6 days ago

    All 3 D compilers, dmd gcd and ldc, are free.

Which "free" does drayno mean, and which does Walter?

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> That's one thing that's kind of nice about Japanese. Native words and loanwords are written in different alphabets (sort of like uppercase vs lowercase), so unlike English, you generally know if a word is a properly-pronounced native word or a potentially-differently-pronounced loanword. (Not that this is necessarily the original reason for the separate native/foreign alphabets, but it's at least a nice benefit.)

I don't see having 3 alphabets as having some sort of compelling advantage that remotely compares with the cost of learning 3 alphabets and 3 spellings for everything.

"Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:gpc2ik$2t80$1@digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> That's one thing that's kind of nice about Japanese. Native words and loanwords are written in different alphabets (sort of like uppercase vs lowercase), so unlike English, you generally know if a word is a properly-pronounced native word or a potentially-differently-pronounced loanword. (Not that this is necessarily the original reason for the separate native/foreign alphabets, but it's at least a nice benefit.)
>
> I don't see having 3 alphabets as having some sort of compelling advantage that remotely compares with the cost of learning 3 alphabets and 3 spellings for everything.

Native Japanese words never use the Katakana alphabet, and loanwords never use the Hiragana alphabet (those are the two phonetic alphabets). So in Japanese, each word has at most 2 written forms: one using the non-phonetic Chinese Kanji characters (ie, the third alphabet) and one using just whichever -kana is appropriate. Also, suffixes and articles (ie, not the "magazine" type) are always (to my knowledge) in Hiragana, never one of the other two alphabets.

Also, the "two" phonetic Japanese alphabets are really comparable to either uppercase vs lowercase or cursive vs print. So in the same sense that Japanese has three alphabets, we really have four.

"Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message news:gpc4m6$30nt$1@digitalmars.com...
> "Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:gpc2ik$2t80$1@digitalmars.com...
>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> That's one thing that's kind of nice about Japanese. Native words and loanwords are written in different alphabets (sort of like uppercase vs lowercase), so unlike English, you generally know if a word is a properly-pronounced native word or a potentially-differently-pronounced loanword. (Not that this is necessarily the original reason for the separate native/foreign alphabets, but it's at least a nice benefit.)
>>
>> I don't see having 3 alphabets as having some sort of compelling advantage that remotely compares with the cost of learning 3 alphabets and 3 spellings for everything.
>
> Native Japanese words never use the Katakana alphabet, and loanwords never use the Hiragana alphabet (those are the two phonetic alphabets). So in Japanese, each word has at most 2 written forms: one using the non-phonetic Chinese Kanji characters (ie, the third alphabet) and one using just whichever -kana is appropriate. Also, suffixes and articles (ie, not the "magazine" type) are always (to my knowledge) in Hiragana, never one of the other two alphabets.
>
> Also, the "two" phonetic Japanese alphabets are really comparable to either uppercase vs lowercase or cursive vs print. So in the same sense that Japanese has three alphabets, we really have four.
>

Also, I'm not saying that their way is either better or worse overall. I'm just saying that it does at least have certain benefits.

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Nick Sabalausky <a@a.a> wrote:
> "Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message news:gpc4m6$30nt$1@digitalmars.com...
>> "Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:gpc2ik$2t80$1@digitalmars.com...
>>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>> That's one thing that's kind of nice about Japanese. Native words and loanwords are written in different alphabets (sort of like uppercase vs lowercase), so unlike English, you generally know if a word is a properly-pronounced native word or a potentially-differently-pronounced loanword. (Not that this is necessarily the original reason for the separate native/foreign alphabets, but it's at least a nice benefit.)
>>>
>>> I don't see having 3 alphabets as having some sort of compelling advantage that remotely compares with the cost of learning 3 alphabets and 3 spellings for everything.
>>
>> Native Japanese words never use the Katakana alphabet, and loanwords never use the Hiragana alphabet (those are the two phonetic alphabets). So in Japanese, each word has at most 2 written forms: one using the non-phonetic Chinese Kanji characters (ie, the third alphabet) and one using just whichever -kana is appropriate. Also, suffixes and articles (ie, not the "magazine" type) are always (to my knowledge) in Hiragana, never one of the other two alphabets.
>>
>> Also, the "two" phonetic Japanese alphabets are really comparable to either uppercase vs lowercase or cursive vs print. So in the same sense that Japanese has three alphabets, we really have four.
>>
>
> Also, I'm not saying that their way is either better or worse overall. I'm just saying that it does at least have certain benefits.

I can tell you that my son is having a much easier time learning to read hiragana than roman letters.   He knows his ABCs but he still can't really read much of anything using what he knows.   The hiragana on the other hand, once you know 'ka' for instance it's pronounced precisely 'ka' wherever you see it.  So he calls them out on all the signs he sees.  The only mistake he makes is sometimes reading right to left instead of left to right.   But he gets frustrated trying to pronounce English words.

The nice thing about hiragana being so easy to learn, is that they can use those as pronunciation guides for kids.  So in kids books any non-hiragana word will have "furigana" I think they call it, above the kanji, which are the pronunciation of the kanji written in hiragana.

It actually made me think that it would be nice if there were two systems for spelling English words, just for the purpose of making it easier for kids to achieve literacy.  I mean one system that is regular, systematic, and compact, in addition to the goofy one we've become accustomed to.

--bb

--bb

Bill Baxter escribió:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Nick Sabalausky <a@a.a> wrote:
>> "Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message
>> news:gpc4m6$30nt$1@digitalmars.com...
>>> "Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message
>>> news:gpc2ik$2t80$1@digitalmars.com...
>>>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>>> That's one thing that's kind of nice about Japanese. Native words and
>>>>> loanwords are written in different alphabets (sort of like uppercase vs
>>>>> lowercase), so unlike English, you generally know if a word is a
>>>>> properly-pronounced native word or a potentially-differently-pronounced
>>>>> loanword. (Not that this is necessarily the original reason for the
>>>>> separate native/foreign alphabets, but it's at least a nice benefit.)
>>>> I don't see having 3 alphabets as having some sort of compelling
>>>> advantage that remotely compares with the cost of learning 3 alphabets
>>>> and 3 spellings for everything.
>>> Native Japanese words never use the Katakana alphabet, and loanwords never
>>> use the Hiragana alphabet (those are the two phonetic alphabets). So in
>>> Japanese, each word has at most 2 written forms: one using the
>>> non-phonetic Chinese Kanji characters (ie, the third alphabet) and one
>>> using just whichever -kana is appropriate. Also, suffixes and articles
>>> (ie, not the "magazine" type) are always (to my knowledge) in Hiragana,
>>> never one of the other two alphabets.
>>>
>>> Also, the "two" phonetic Japanese alphabets are really comparable to
>>> either uppercase vs lowercase or cursive vs print. So in the same sense
>>> that Japanese has three alphabets, we really have four.
>>>
>> Also, I'm not saying that their way is either better or worse overall. I'm
>> just saying that it does at least have certain benefits.
> 
> I can tell you that my son is having a much easier time learning to
> read hiragana than roman letters.   He knows his ABCs but he still
> can't really read much of anything using what he knows.   The hiragana
> on the other hand, once you know 'ka' for instance it's pronounced
> precisely 'ka' wherever you see it.  So he calls them out on all the
> signs he sees.  The only mistake he makes is sometimes reading right
> to left instead of left to right.   But he gets frustrated trying to
> pronounce English words.

Spanish, French and Italian are also easy in that sense. There's not much choice as to how to pronounce a word. Either a letter is pronounced always the same, or a combination of letters is pronounced always the same. The only gotcha is that many letters may have the same sound, so by hearing the word you might not know how to write it.

In the company I work we just finished building a website, chose a name for it, and we still don't know how it is pronounced in English. We only have suppositions. :-P

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Ary Borenszweig <ary@esperanto.org.ar> wrote:
> In the company I work we just finished building a website, chose a name for it, and we still don't know how it is pronounced in English. We only have suppositions. :-P

"NAY-un" or "NAY-oon" would be by guess.

Jarrett Billingsley, el 12 de marzo a las 14:09 me escribiste:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Leandro Lucarella <llucax@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Free Software is a very ambiguous term too (many people think of "free" as
> > in no charge).
> >
> > Unfortunately English is a very crappy language ;)
> 
> I think with the absurd preponderance of FLOSS proponents saying "free as in freedom!" the term "free software" really cannot be interpreted as anything *but* FLOSS anymore.  Frankly I'm sick of hearing "free as in freedom!" and "libre!" all the goddamn time, I know what is meant :P

You can say the exact same thing about Open Source, but this thread shows there are people that still need the clarifications =)

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cómo ser inconmensurablemente atractivo a la mujer del sexo opuesto.
	-- Libro de autoayuda de Hector Mesina.

Don, el 12 de marzo a las 21:01 me escribiste:
> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Leandro Lucarella <llucax@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>Free Software is a very ambiguous term too (many people think of "free" as
> >>in no charge).
> >>
> >>Unfortunately English is a very crappy language ;)
> 
> It's a great ball of mud. Fascinating and structureless.
> 
> >I think with the absurd preponderance of FLOSS proponents saying "free as in freedom!" the term "free software" really cannot be interpreted as anything *but* FLOSS anymore.  Frankly I'm sick of hearing "free as in freedom!" and "libre!" all the goddamn time, I know what is meant :P
> Yes. It's a lot more obvious in German. frei = liberty, kostenloss = no cost. Maybe they need to change the name to: "Frei Software" <g>.
> 
> The upshot of all this, though, is it seems there's no term for "source is available" (without necessarily being able to be redistributed).

True.

Maybe it's because it's such an unpopular category that nobody cared enough to make up a name and promote it =)

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever tried? Ever failed? - Try again! Fail better!

Jeff Nowakowski, el 12 de marzo a las 17:48 me escribiste:
> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> >I think with the absurd preponderance of FLOSS proponents saying "free as in freedom!" the term "free software" really cannot be interpreted as anything *but* FLOSS anymore.  Frankly I'm sick of hearing "free as in freedom!" and "libre!" all the goddamn time, I know what is meant :P
> 
> From the Reddit thread:
> 
>     drayno 5 points 6 days ago
> 
>     Anyone here actually use D for real work? I've always thought
>     it looked well architected, like a better C++, but it seems
>     hampered by the lack of a complete correct FREE
>     implementation.
> 
>     WalterBright 5 points 6 days ago
> 
>     All 3 D compilers, dmd gcd and ldc, are free.
> 
> Which "free" does drayno mean, and which does Walter?

Unless drayno is very dumb (I'm not saying it's not =), I assume he meant
free as in freedom, because anybody knows (or should if is interested
enough) that even DMD can be downloaded with no charge.

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
La esperanza es una amiga que nos presta la ilusión.