On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 2:03 PM, John E Cliff= ord <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:

LoCCan3 has been for more than 20 years (and before tha= t there was Loglan 2.0) a repository for noting flaws perceived in Lojban (= and before that Loglan) and for suggested solutions and other improvements = (read scare quotes where you will).=A0 The active content has varied over t= he years: no one is hot for adding or dropping phonemes at the moment, for = example.=A0 But a few items have endured, usually connected with perceived = problems.

0.=A0 A complete redo of the vocabulary (obviously not back-comp= atible).=A0 The present vocab clusters in some phonetic spaces and leaves o= thers bare, increasing the likelihood of confusion in noisy environments (i= f Lojban is ever used in one) and making it harder to find fragments for co= nstructing compounds and related cmavo.=A0 The only reason for the present word list is the claimed ease of learning, a claim that has ne= ver been tested on even English speakers, let alone Chinese or other langua= ges or relevant multilinguals.=A0 The evidence presented is either intuitiv= e or anecdotal and these are countered by anecdotal difficulties ("fal= se friends" they used to be called).=A0 The revamp includes a revision= of the definitions, which could be done separately (with a bit more compat= ibility) to make the definitions simpler (generally fewer places, with many= places that occur in many definitions but are rarely used spun off to prep= ositions) and more uniform (all words of the same sort (you are keeping you= r supply of scare quotes running, I hope) would have the same pattern of pl= aces).=A0 A general shake down of the cmavo system is also part of this, sh= arpening definitions, clarifying roles, getting rid of detritus, relieving = confusion pressure, etc.=A0 For the most part, this is not Lojban at all but the beginnings of a real third generation from Loglan.=A0 So no= t going to happen until the next charismatic nut-case comes along.
1. Anaphora.=A0 The logical ideal is a way to refer back to = any previously mentioned thing unambiguously and transparently from anywher= e in the later discourse.=A0 Practically impossible with pronouns, unless e= very noun is assigned a carrier at birth (and there are problems even with = that).=A0 Loglan can come remarkably close, but the system barely works wit= h written text and is just not practical in spoken language beyond very sho= rt intervals.=A0 The usable Lojban techniques, official and not, work as we= ll as the unofficial for the most part but are also of limited scope.=A0 Th= e rule "Repetition is also anaphora" seems the best way to go, th= ough even it has to be used carefully in some=A0=A0 Cataphora (referring to= something about to be mentioned) is always short scope and can be eased by mentioning it now already.
2.=A0 Words for individuals and sets and masses arose out of the muddle, = inherited from Loglan and not much tidied up in CLL, about what exactly = 9;lo broda' referred to.=A0 The old underlying logic had only individua= ls, some of which were sets that contained other individuals (or not).=A0 T= he problem then was to deal with groups that did not behave like sets in se= t theory but could still go in for individual variables.=A0 For some reason= , the notion that ordinary sets could take properties in different ways fro= m the usual ways for sets did not occur to anyone, so this remained a probl= em.=A0 Until xorxes found a book about plural reference/instantiation.=A0 A= ccording to this, a singular noun could refer to several things at once and= a singular variable could be simultaneously instantiated to several things= at once.=A0 Conceptually differently, but formally the same, sets could be Lesniewskian rather than Cantorian, so that getting to= the members of a set is much easier (as is talking about what happens).=A0= Once 'lo broda' was taken to refer to an L-set of brodas, much of = the rest fell into place.=A0 Because the theory is also of the part-whole r= elation, it is sometimes necessary to distinguish the relevant individuals = (ones with no relevant parts) and also to be able to talk about wholes (L-s= ets) in the abstract way that one normally talks about C-sets.=A0 This mean= s that some of the gadri need redefinition (or clarification of the given d= efinitions).=A0 There are also some residual problems with 'lo' lef= t over from Loglan that need sorting out.=A0 None of this has much affect o= n current or past text.

3,=A0 The original four logical connectives, and their derivativ= es (often more interesting) and the handful of non-logical ones have multip= lied sixfold or more.=A0 As the language is built, these are needed to preserve the underlying logical= structure, to provide a way to get back to the underlying simple sentences= connected sententially=A0 from the given complex sentence involving connec= ted terms or predicates or bridi tails or whatever.=A0 The quest here has b= een to find a simpler way of marking these transformations without needing = a whole new vocabulary at each stage.=A0 The fact that the reconstruction p= rocess involved is not proven to be correct also needs some looking at.=A0 = This may be a minor matter of reinterpreting given forms or it may take a t= horough reworking of the connective parts of the grammar.

4.=A0 RHE.=A0 Though the grammatical right-hand end problems are= mainly solved (with the constant danger of misuse leading to your saying s= omething quite different from what you meant), the logical ones are less we= ll dealt with (the "get back to the formula" problem seen in 3).=A0 So far, informal conventions seem to be in place and there = are some cmavo for doing some of these jobs.=A0 But they are rarely used an= d not well described.=A0 They do not form clear groups in the cmavo lists, = though grouping them might not be a problem (and the fact that they are ver= y different might be an advantage).=A0

That is what LoCCan3 actively contains at the momen= t.

From: gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
<= b>To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 2, 2012 = 4:41 AM
Subject: [lojban= ] Re: Is there any demand for LoCCan3?

Let's discuss it now ))).
After reading the article I want new= language even less.
The monkey took the banana and ate it.=A0
P= am went home because she felt sick.=A0=A0
The dog ate the bird = and it died.=A0 (!!!!!!!!!!!)

In each case I can use {ta} and the context will decide= who felt sick (the house or Pam) and who died (the dog or the bird).
=

In other cases =A0vo'a, ko'a can solve the prob= lem.

{sei} can be problematic for me but I hope CLL 1.1 will explain it.

I can think of no other cases of anap= hora.

And it's still am mystery for me what ca= n be done with

2. There should be new cmavo for individuals, sets and masses
3. new design of connectives

On Monday, July 2, 2012 10:26:12 AM UTC+4, la .lindar. wrote: It's come up a few times.
https://en.w= ikipedia.org/wiki/ Anaphora_(linguistics)

= I think we're working on the rest.

It's a theoretical next-step language, but I don= 9;t see it happening any time soon since we're changing up our game.