Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:55:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: TR NS <transfire@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <f991dbdf-dc36-4c86-9135-db5a293b08e7@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <5418737E.1060702@lojban.org>
References: <e0b23cf5-5a67-4a9b-8db0-7d310eb4116e@googlegroups.com> <541714B1.9080300@gmail.com> <b7dbd33d-3ebd-48eb-b45e-6e90d4f59491@googlegroups.com> <CAO7bV+hBU3TyXr56V_q1C2mQAybuMfo3_00U_DVb16m=VeoH4A@mail.gmail.com> <b83f94eb-1ae9-4959-ba42-c056d2066383@googlegroups.com> <CAMKwHj0Zd2bYcYPv08n2LRHFN74AL_BkMHee5ZPaw=1AS9P8Gw@mail.gmail.com> <rcg01o00r56Cr6M01cg1eY>
 <5418737E.1060702@lojban.org>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Logos Initiative
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_23_800404301.1410900915169"
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

------=_Part_23_800404301.1410900915169
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 1:29:34 PM UTC-4, lojbab wrote:
>
>
> No. CLL 1.1 is NOT intended to sit around for a decade, but to serve as 
> the basis for discussing the proposals that people want considered.  If 
> those proposals are well-documented, I could imagine CLL 1.1 be replaced 
> by CLL 2.0 within a couple of years at most. 
>
>
I wonder how you can say that. Didn't you say much the same thing 12 years 
ago? And he we are still waiting for a dictionary? It seems like a very 
unrealistic expectation. Of course, if you're simply planning to rubber 
stamp 1.1 as 2.0 with a few minor adjustments then I guess it could be true.
 

> > Anything more than a minor proposal after it will be immediately hit 
> > with the argument that people are relying on the stability of the new 
> > CLL. By the time the next edition needs to be printed (in 2030?) 
>
> We aren't doing a print run of 1500 books.  Indeed, CLL 1.1 might be 
> published only by Print-on-Demand, like the introductory book available 
> through Lightning Source (though, we may need to make it hardbound 
> simply because of page count.) 
>
> > The bottom line is that ideas like a morphology that doesn't require 
> > stress to parse, or the use of the final vowel to indicate sumti 
> > position, or a simplified rafsi system that doesn't require 
> > memorization, and so on, are simply never going to be given 
> > consideration. 
>
> Probably true.  It's also likely that such an effort would not be 
> considered enough like Loglan/Lojban to warrant calling them a 
> "derivation".  English is after all a derivation of Indo-European, and 
> more recently Old English, but relatively few people care to learn 
> anything about those predecessors. 
>
>
It's all a matter of degree and you can draw the line where you like, of 
course. One could also argue the same about Lojban vs Loglan since the 
vocabularies are completely different. 

Btw, did you hear that Loglan got rid of `x`?

-- 
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.

------=_Part_23_800404301.1410900915169
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 1:29:34 PM UTC-4, lojbab wr=
ote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex=
;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><br>No. CLL 1.1 is NOT int=
ended to sit around for a decade, but to serve as=20
<br>the basis for discussing the proposals that people want considered. &nb=
sp;If=20
<br>those proposals are well-documented, I could imagine CLL 1.1 be replace=
d=20
<br>by CLL 2.0 within a couple of years at most.
<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I wonder how you can say that. Didn't =
you say much the same thing 12 years ago? And he we are still waiting for a=
 dictionary? It seems like a very unrealistic expectation. Of course, if yo=
u're simply planning to rubber stamp 1.1 as 2.0 with a few minor adjustment=
s then I guess it could be true.</div><div>&nbsp;<br></div><blockquote clas=
s=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">&gt; Anything more than a minor proposal after=
 it will be immediately hit
<br>&gt; with the argument that people are relying on the stability of the =
new
<br>&gt; CLL. By the time the next edition needs to be printed (in 2030?)
<br>
<br>We aren't doing a print run of 1500 books. &nbsp;Indeed, CLL 1.1 might =
be=20
<br>published only by Print-on-Demand, like the introductory book available=
=20
<br>through Lightning Source (though, we may need to make it hardbound=20
<br>simply because of page count.)
<br>
<br>&gt; The bottom line is that ideas like a morphology that doesn't requi=
re
<br>&gt; stress to parse, or the use of the final vowel to indicate sumti
<br>&gt; position, or a simplified rafsi system that doesn't require
<br>&gt; memorization, and so on, are simply never going to be given
<br>&gt; consideration.
<br>
<br>Probably true. &nbsp;It's also likely that such an effort would not be=
=20
<br>considered enough like Loglan/Lojban to warrant calling them a=20
<br>"derivation". &nbsp;English is after all a derivation of Indo-European,=
 and=20
<br>more recently Old English, but relatively few people care to learn=20
<br>anything about those predecessors.
<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It's all a matter of degree and you ca=
n draw the line where you like, of course. One could also argue the same ab=
out Lojban vs Loglan since the vocabularies are completely different.&nbsp;=
</div><div><br></div><div>Btw, did you hear that Loglan got rid of `x`?</di=
v><div><br></div></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 <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<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/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

------=_Part_23_800404301.1410900915169--