From lojbab@lojban.org Tue Aug 06 20:35:40 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 7 Aug 2002 03:35:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 39632 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2002 03:35:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 7 Aug 2002 03:35:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao02.cox.net) (68.1.17.243) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Aug 2002 03:35:39 -0000 Received: from lojban.lojban.org ([68.100.206.153]) by lakemtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20020807033536.INNF3097.lakemtao02.cox.net@lojban.lojban.org> for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2002 23:35:36 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020806232758.033cd340@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 23:35:36 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: non-core translations In-Reply-To: <0208061904260D.02750@neofelis> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020806174544.0324bd40@pop.east.cox.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20020806174544.0324bd40@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Robert LeChevalier X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab At 07:04 PM 8/6/02 -0400, Pierre Abbat wrote: > > Removing places would be a violation of the standards of the baseline as > > conveyed to me when we started, and hence would require a higher degree of > > consensus than I think is possible. If it was in fact agreed, and no > > example in the CLL enshrines the current place structure, you would have a > > stronger case than normal, but under the guidelines I've received, I am not > > considering any such changes and will not do so on my own. We don't have a > > Lojban academy, so you basically have to convince the whole community and > > document the change. > >Is it possible to *add* places? {remna} denotes a member of a species, and so >ought to have an x2 for the species, as does {cinfo}; and likewise {panje} if >used for the animal. As I said, my interpretation of the mandate given to me is that the place structures are baselined are not to be changed. Clarifications make sense if the community agrees that they are necessary, and if people agree as to what the clarification should be. The standard for a place structure change at this late date would likely have to require convincing a consensus of the community that the status quo is broken to the point of being unusable (which Jorge probably feels about a couple of the gismu). panje was not necessarily intended to be an animal. Whether you consider remna an animal probably depends on your religion/philosophy, and Lojban is officially neutral on such things. cinfo was probably a mistake, but since so many people question having the species place on any of the animals/animals, it is hard to call it a critical mistake sufficient to warrant a baseline change. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org