Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:31:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: iesk <pa.fae@gmx.de>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <e9998846-aa65-436b-968a-c94ef5cca7df@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <526E8083.6070206@gmx.de>
References: <82e3500a-a054-43bd-bf9e-9c0e3162d39b@googlegroups.com> <e17e05b2-9c96-4873-a0cd-52e1c9fb46c4@googlegroups.com>
 <526E8083.6070206@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Officialness, spin-off projects, dialects, communication
 with the outside world
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_209_16841606.1382977891235"
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_209_16841606.1382977891235
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Selpa'i:
>Do you really want to get into this discussion? It's all politics.

Language politics, too, is part of the Sprachspiel. All is one. =E0=A5=90 ;=
)

So, well, no, I don=E2=80=99t really want to get into that. However:
=E2=80=93 The MediaWiki has a different logo.
=E2=80=93 It describes at least one divergent dialect.
=E2=80=93 It describes 'official Lojban' in the past tense and calls it obs=
olete.

Taken together, LMW kind of looks like a spin-off project. Since I don=E2=
=80=99t=20
know that much about Lojban politics, I was, believe it or not, somewhat=20
confused if something had changed 'officially' or not. That=E2=80=99s more =
or less=20
it. My contribution to the community is more or less zero, so I don=E2=80=
=99t=20
consider my opinion particularly important, yet I thought I=E2=80=99d voice=
 up=20
anyway.

>Yes, let's say that's official. So what? That's not very informative, if
>people have the freedom (and use it) to speak however they want. Needing
>a {ku} is just annoying, why hang on to it? This is a rhetorical question.

It is useful to know that when you put stuff into something called 'the=20
official parser', the {ku} is needed. Which is orthogonal to whether it is=
=20
annoying or not.

>Now there are lots of unofficial projects on it, but that's the natural
>result of the conservative "leadership". The user base is going to do
>what they think is right, and they will make the changes no matter what.

Mostly agreed. Norm is not usage. Yet what language regulators (those=20
institutions that carry some 'official' stamp around with them) do or do=20
not propagate *does* influence usage, and language change, and speakers=E2=
=80=99=20
attitudes. It *is* a relevant information what LLG considers official.=20
(Take the 1990s German spelling reform: no-one is *forced* to use the new=
=20
spelling, at least not in their private correspondence, yet many [most?]=20
people, although complaining, adapted more or less from the beginning, or=
=20
at least think they did, even though it is a particularly useless and=20
crappy reform.)

>There is demand for
>change, but the conservative party blocks any ambitions. Nothing must
>change!

I can=E2=80=99t believe it, but apparently I somewhat am conservative. Mayb=
e it=E2=80=99s=20
just a pathological fear of being left behind=E2=80=94I first peeped into C=
LL some=20
time in the 1990s, and still don=E2=80=99t speak the bangu, and now I see i=
t being=20
reformed before I ever reach that goal! ;) I do, however, use non-official=
=20
stuff myself!

>Right, except there is no agreed-upon official version (assuming you
>don't only talk about grammar, but also semantics, which in my opinion
>cannot be ignored, but some think Lojban equals Lojban's grammar).

Semantics is part of grammar in my idiolect. I believe that=E2=80=94while L=
ojban=20
semantics can of course be described in any language=E2=80=94it can only co=
me into=20
being *in* Lojban-language usage. So, what we consider official Lojban does=
=20
not really tell us a lot about semantics, does it?


--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

------=_Part_209_16841606.1382977891235
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Selpa'i:<br>&gt;Do you really want to get into this discus=
sion? It's all politics.<br><br>Language politics, too, is part of the Spra=
chspiel. All is one. =E0=A5=90 ;)<br><br>So, well, no, I don=E2=80=99t real=
ly want to get into that. However:<br>=E2=80=93 The MediaWiki has a differe=
nt logo.<br>=E2=80=93 It describes at least one divergent dialect.<br>=E2=
=80=93 It describes 'official Lojban' in the past tense and calls it obsole=
te.<br><br>Taken together, LMW kind of looks like a spin-off project. Since=
 I don=E2=80=99t know that much about Lojban politics, I was, believe it or=
 not, somewhat confused if something had changed 'officially' or not. That=
=E2=80=99s more or less it. My contribution to the community is more or les=
s zero, so I don=E2=80=99t consider my opinion particularly important, yet =
I thought I=E2=80=99d voice up anyway.<br><br>&gt;Yes, let's say that's off=
icial. So what? That's not very informative, if<br>&gt;people have the free=
dom (and use it) to speak however they want. Needing<br>&gt;a {ku} is just =
annoying, why hang on to it? This is a rhetorical question.<br><br>It is us=
eful to know that when you put stuff into something called 'the official pa=
rser', the {ku} is needed. Which is orthogonal to whether it is annoying or=
 not.<br><br>&gt;Now there are lots of unofficial projects on it, but that'=
s the natural<br>&gt;result of the conservative "leadership". The user base=
 is going to do<br>&gt;what they think is right, and they will make the cha=
nges no matter what.<br><br>Mostly agreed. Norm is not usage. Yet what lang=
uage regulators (those institutions that carry some 'official' stamp around=
 with them) do or do not propagate *does* influence usage, and language cha=
nge, and speakers=E2=80=99 attitudes. It *is* a relevant information what L=
LG considers official. (Take the 1990s German spelling reform: no-one is *f=
orced* to use the new spelling, at least not in their private correspondenc=
e, yet many [most?] people, although complaining, adapted more or less from=
 the beginning, or at least think they did, even though it is a particularl=
y useless and crappy reform.)<br><br>&gt;There is demand for<br>&gt;change,=
 but the conservative party blocks any ambitions. Nothing must<br>&gt;chang=
e!<br><br>I can=E2=80=99t believe it, but apparently I somewhat am conserva=
tive. Maybe it=E2=80=99s just a pathological fear of being left behind=E2=
=80=94I first peeped into CLL some time in the 1990s, and still don=E2=80=
=99t speak the bangu, and now I see it being reformed before I ever reach t=
hat goal! ;) I do, however, use non-official stuff myself!<br><br>&gt;Right=
, except there is no agreed-upon official version (assuming you<br>&gt;don'=
t only talk about grammar, but also semantics, which in my opinion<br>&gt;c=
annot be ignored, but some think Lojban equals Lojban's grammar).<br><br>Se=
mantics is part of grammar in my idiolect. I believe that=E2=80=94while Loj=
ban semantics can of course be described in any language=E2=80=94it can onl=
y come into being *in* Lojban-language usage. So, what we consider official=
 Lojban does not really tell us a lot about semantics, does it?<br><br><br>=
<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out=
">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br />

------=_Part_209_16841606.1382977891235--