Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.17.20 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.17.20;
Message-ID: <53820348.509@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 16:50:48 +0200
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Balningau: The Great Update
References: <b3d39fc1-7bcf-42c7-accf-5bf992ff183d@googlegroups.com> <20140525161129.7cff160d@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140525161129.7cff160d@aol.com>
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

la .uuz=C3=ACt. cu cusku di'e
> If you change even just one (!) gismu definition, you have to deal with
> these problems:
> - Ambiguity. People may wonder =E2=80=9CHmmm? Did person X mean =E2=80=98=
broda=E2=80=99 in the
> sense BEFORE or AFTER the gismu rewrite?=E2=80=9D.

This is already happening both with gismu and with cmavo. Some people=20
use a word one way, and others use it another way. Try to compare some=20
texts and you will find conflicting usage. Old texts are also full of=20
usage that is now considered incorrect, but reading them and knowing=20
when they were written, we can easily understand why and don't need to=20
be confused. As for gismu, lots of people for instance use {traji}=20
without its old x3 place, lots of people use {mabla} with a new definition.

> - Even if people knew that, lojbanists basically may be split into two
> camps, the =E2=80=9Cbefore gismu rewrite=E2=80=9D and the =E2=80=9Cafter =
gismu rewrite=E2=80=9D camp.

Already the case for cmavo and for several gismu. Consider Lojbab who=20
refuses to use xorlo even though it's official.

> - The existing regular lujvo using this gismu may become irregular. A
> person may wonder =E2=80=9CHuh? Where did that X place come from?=E2=80=
=9D. The lujvo
> would still work, but remembering will be harder.

Regular lujvo will change automatically in usage and where needed the=20
definitions can be updated in the dictionary.

> - This will likely invalidate many texts from before the change, since
> gismu are used so often in the language.

Yes, but it will not make the texts uninterpretable by any means, just=20
like xorlo didn't. There are actually several changes that are part of=20
the BPFK cmavo specification that invalidate large chunks of usage (e.g.=20
ZAhO or VA). They reflect modern usage at the cost of making old texts=20
awkward or simply incorrect. The changes still happened, and it's good=20
that they did, because the new definitions are better. So where is the=20
difference?

I may also add that whatever changes the BPFK or whatever other=20
language-defining body makes to the language, I *will* update my=20
writings to reflect that, and I've written some 60 thousand words. This=20
is not the problem.

> I am not saying these problems are neccessarily unsolvable. But the
> proposal does not seem to address any of these problems.

Well, instead of shooting it down categorically, you could have asked=20
for clarification. Afterall, this is supposed to be a joint effort.

> It would be nice if we just could change the gismu =E2=80=9Cfor free=E2=
=80=9D. But
> actually, the price of changing just one gismu is rather high. And you
> want to change ALL gismu if I understood correctly.

*Looking* at every gismu does not entail *changing* every gismu. All of=20
this is in essence a democratic process, driven by the desires of the=20
community. Nobody is going to change {dunda}, for example. There will be=20
no changes made just for the sake of changing things.

There is a non-negligible number of people who support the revision and=20
who are going to take part. Maybe they are going to speak up themselves.

mi'e la selpa'i mu'o

--=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/d/optout.