Received: from mail-ie0-f189.google.com ([209.85.223.189]:60708) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XPF8F-0006vi-TV for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:18:13 -0700 Received: by mail-ie0-f189.google.com with SMTP id at20sf1945917iec.26 for ; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:18:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=abllNeDKvLIpmQ5xkEA3BnycxOZ78kvJ+QKeK37uQko=; b=Ys2kRd6hjTZozokLWNZew75oSeHdfQLJADtbpSdbixVJhjLskwyE5SlvNqQ9zjy+qH 2aedMV6va6fkhQxtBona6fmly6zvhc+y662gTJ/DAr6B5reFHOmJLEQ9dKGEuoMqZ+vE VxgC2kBQJOl8XNyR9D9sNfd8RpR7Mm6I84Feup+4QVA3+v1YKD84mrGbahoD2gfI7EK8 7EB+sYdA2OvV5mbOA5lcXblXhItEAb8slp1xrL1RvpFnSTp/m9WodslA6qFGyTdmnU2k cSV4FL5JRpdx0YRqvlgs6LmfH4d1SfPJFCxSPxDJcqZ+PDDnaISGu+fHFcmyYT6UPhuG r1IQ== X-Received: by 10.50.79.201 with SMTP id l9mr637503igx.5.1409768285477; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:18:05 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.50.211 with SMTP id e19ls3426013igo.25.canary; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:18:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.66.155.194 with SMTP id vy2mr23893233pab.19.1409768284828; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22f.google.com (mail-oi0-x22f.google.com [2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22f]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s20si291746igd.0.2014.09.03.11.18.04 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22f; Received: by mail-oi0-f47.google.com with SMTP id a141so3715114oig.6 for ; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:18:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.120.129 with SMTP id lc1mr10744371obb.65.1409768284485; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.183.10.135 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 11:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.183.10.135 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 11:18:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1409759095.40258.YahooMailNeo@web181102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <5eccb6c5-6904-4b30-a49c-455e9bb1d32a@googlegroups.com> <5406CBB8.20305@gmail.com> <1409759095.40258.YahooMailNeo@web181102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 19:18:04 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: criticism of lojban needed From: And Rosta To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22f as permitted sender) smtp.mail=and.rosta@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0117616dcffe3f05022d41e2 X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - --089e0117616dcffe3f05022d41e2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 This is an important point. If you restrict the set of candidate languages only to living ones (i.e. with speaker community), then despite its many faults Lojban is patently the best choice if you want what you aptly term "monoparsing". More generally, most of the PR claims for Lojban are valid if and only if the set of candidate languages is restricted to living languages. (Which restriction is not unreasonable.) --And. On 3 Sep 2014 16:44, "'John E Clifford' via lojban" wrote: > Yup! If your goal isn't monoparsing, you have no reason to be interested > in Lojban/Loglan. If your goal is monoparsing, Lojan/Loglan may be the > only living option but its success is not proven and, even if it were, it > does just about everything in the worst possible way. > > Let's see how that line of objections, rather than ones to the cosmetics, > can be met and turned into a positive discussion of Lojban. > > > On Wednesday, September 3, 2014 3:04 AM, And Rosta > wrote: > > > On Monday, September 1, 2014 4:07:03 AM UTC-4, la gleki wrote: > > the wikipedia article about lojban might need a short list of > > criticism of lojban with links (e.g. to posts in this mailing list). > > Balanced criticism actually makes languages more popular, so it's > > advisable to make such a list. > > Lojban's greatest success is this: > > 1. The founders of Lojban set themselves the absolutely overriding goal of > creating a version of Loglan that is stable and has a community of users. > This goal was achieved. > > My main criticisms of Loglan/Lojban are: > > 2. Even if being a Whorfian experiment -- as Loglan not very credibly > purported to be -- were of academic interest, the experiment design was so > poor as to render it an utter failure as an experiment. > > 3. Even relative to the compartively simple task of creating a logical > language, Lojban does an exceptionally poor job. There are no formal rules > that map a sentence's phonological form to its logical form, and to a large > but very slowly diminishing extent there are no informal rules that do that > either. There are ways to unambiguously encode logical forms in Lojban > sentences, but these are clunky, verbose and unergonomic (and therefore > largely unused); and anybody giving the problem twenty minutes' thought > could have come up with a better design than Lojban's. > > 4. The morphosyntax of Lojban is full of unnecessary baroque complexity -- > the proliferations of allomorphy, word-classes, constructions, function > words could also be very drastically simplified. > > 5. Goal (1) is not a very interesting goal: having a stable language with > a community of users is interesting only if the language itself is worthy > of being a stable language with a community of users. Criticisms (2) and, > in my view, particularly (3) and (4) mean the language itself isn't worthy > of being a stable language with a community of users. That is, there are no > reasons why it is a Good Thing to learn and use Lojban; any attempt to > persuade people otherwise would in my view by deluded or dishonest. (A > "Good Thing" is something more than just "whatever floats your boat".) > > I've written at length about (3) and (4) elsewhere, on Lojban and Conlang > lists. > > --And. > > > -- > 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 > email 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. > > > -- > 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 > email 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. > -- 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 email 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. --089e0117616dcffe3f05022d41e2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This is an important point. If you restrict the set of candi= date languages only to living ones (i.e. with speaker community), then desp= ite its many faults Lojban is patently the best choice if you want what you= aptly term "monoparsing".

More generally, most of the PR claims for Lojban are valid i= f and only if the set of candidate languages is restricted to living langua= ges. (Which restriction is not unreasonable.)

--And.=C2=A0=C2=A0

On 3 Sep 2014 16:44, "'John E Clifford&= #39; via lojban" <lojban= @googlegroups.com> wrote:
=
Yup! =C2=A0If your goal isn't monoparsing, you have no reaso= n to be interested in Lojban/Loglan. =C2=A0If your goal is monoparsing, Loj= an/Loglan may be the only living option but its success is not proven and, = even if it were, it does just about everything in the worst possible way.

Let's see how that line of objections, rather than ones to the co= smetics, can be met and turned into a positive discussion of Lojban.

On Wednesday, September 3, 2014 3:04 AM, And Rosta = <and.rosta@gmai= l.com> wrote:


On Monday, September 1, 2014 4:07:03 AM UTC-= 4, la gleki wrote:
> the wikipedia article about lojba= n might need a short list of
> criticism of lojban wit= h links (e.g. to posts in this mailing list).
> Balanced criticism actually makes languages more popular, so it's<= br clear=3D"none">> advisable to make such a list.

Lojban's greatest success i= s this:

1. The founders of Lojban set = themselves the absolutely overriding goal of creating a version of Loglan t= hat is stable and has a community of users. This goal was achieved.

My main criticisms of Loglan/Lojban are:

2. Even if being a Whorfian experiment -- as Loglan n= ot very credibly purported to be -- were of academic interest, the experime= nt design was so poor as to render it an utter failure as an experiment.
3. Even relative to the compartively simple task of crea= ting a logical language, Lojban does an exceptionally poor job. There are n= o formal rules that map a sentence's phonological form to its logical f= orm, and to a large but very slowly diminishing extent there are no informa= l rules that do that either. There are ways to unambiguously encode logical forms in Lojban sentences, but these are clunky, verbose and unerg= onomic (and therefore largely unused); and anybody giving the problem twent= y minutes' thought could have come up with a better design than Lojban&= #39;s.

4. The morphosyntax of Lojban is full of unnecessary bar= oque complexity -- the proliferations of allomorphy, word-classes, construc= tions, function words could also be very drastically simplified.

5. Goal (1) is not a very interesting goal: having a sta= ble language with a community of users is interesting only if the language = itself is worthy of being a stable language with a community of users. Crit= icisms (2) and, in my view, particularly (3) and (4) mean the language itse= lf isn't worthy of being a stable language with a community of users. T= hat is, there are no reasons why it is a Good Thing to learn and use Lojban= ; any attempt to persuade people otherwise would in my view by deluded or dishonest. (A "Good Thing" is something more = than just "whatever floats your boat".)

I've written at length about (3) and (4) elsewhere, on Lojb= an and Conlang lists.

--And.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the = Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe fr= om this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 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.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--089e0117616dcffe3f05022d41e2--