Received: from mail-ig0-f186.google.com ([209.85.213.186]:57128) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XWPrS-0002IH-DM for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 06:10:32 -0700 Received: by mail-ig0-f186.google.com with SMTP id r2sf846730igi.13 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 06:10:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=references:message-id:date:from:reply-to:subject:to:in-reply-to :mime-version:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=6oH0yvzX8rtSCZJcaYqaJ8bkhtmrWeun89VNsw3HV5o=; b=MPVkvaQkpstqb3Me+glQbMVCEifr2tZuxSBlpyYjcdIUZLYI3YT+Lv2qDIraA/lksu /hKlZbAV4dEOoKrHe2yzOKkvPD7ZgR8BSI9k3YshOvLKNLM6kpqCiU6zND1f7ys47v4S ZSGi6RPuKnwG0n4D1QI0kRt6vVpgfpV4bcENyH+5yXzG0x/3IkMsM3KTFPQYDunvYD4P 3dMx4JXJgXaFmwwqyNioS8ZS7d1Jxv/tvx7Kbge0vbcZ8Uz7cCzLDyRzmFsF7+OrtHLG H7OVVo5hZNfUseD3GSZCbM27K20riJBmDLOM+YEV/vPDaxNyopopHCF7BtKAnjd+jk0x KciA== X-Received: by 10.50.80.72 with SMTP id p8mr298886igx.9.1411477095831; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:58:15 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.112.164 with SMTP id ir4ls229091igb.29.gmail; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:58:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.42.207.146 with SMTP id fy18mr1664034icb.12.1411477095252; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm25.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm25.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com. [216.39.62.56]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l7si1583105pdn.0.2014.09.23.05.58.15 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 216.39.62.56 as permitted sender) client-ip=216.39.62.56; Received: from [216.39.60.170] by nm25.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Sep 2014 12:58:14 -0000 Received: from [216.39.60.236] by tm6.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Sep 2014 12:58:14 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1007.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Sep 2014 12:58:14 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 822888.33963.bm@omp1007.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 39335 invoked by uid 60001); 23 Sep 2014 12:58:14 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: waY_.BIVM1kAdEB._9w_Y.sHa.fTKVPUbZgILhymPq8n.6i yTnSZsliQguKcftnvm7MKZ..R_NlKjWLCl7nRzy4VpaqnKDP9AamUBSsFce8 GPmN6DDIvBgaBsqcFf0hdj4S1ejSTjD7aTIP2MB_Bsnakx3J8Gc_4ZDGh.R7 WM8OVMEVx2CwXiAModaVxdevnysRdBIUXPUiFbH7QZf4iEP7MydH4krCOd4i buGN7oXNRUfHBbqTY56HIYUtVrIxU98Nko0mWu5U8omgI8hs243K0jRz5I3a 0r2FkrbgAm91_k8_8MiG8KLn2.DnUPolPrXLN3E0ZJmxOpgaQYnFQDEi2699 I2ancMz.KzYTzkSn_zb_amwA06Jm5p3UvyE97Rkfc9KapJyIg8D565Sxv_qH 6gJbtM0DjaWTkssCRXG7RL1pyXYtfxFp8imvENA5yWdFsjDDm0moiVqZ7ZYX WKmLD3hf6Atcwzxrubgs36Dve7MgVbNaRsmD9x_GCWxOJZKypWA.11vjtAko aahkq1qmsevtqpUFfkstfhkx.86QyS6QMTr10.mHbnvsmI9X9.Z5BgmcwCon q4as3eb_b1_B3R03VFTbuTUn7_24ozyWci07k25R9wWCR_aq2gge26r_E687 8EZBIAqqwzu._dMJoqMcjSeve3V5ecsli.FRFNOwWq8K7pF1K86.9yHfpAkB U6Ip2zesOJFTySlT4R8u6oDe.pz9fiXFkLGPbrQkPfGo- Received: from [99.92.109.82] by web181101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:58:14 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001,TG9zaW5nIHRoZSB0aHJlYWQgaGVyZS4gIEJ1dCAKRW5nbGlzaCBpcyBhIHRvbmFsIGxhbmd1YWdlPyAgRXhhbXBsZXMgcGxlYXNlLgpQb3NpdGlvbmFsIGNhc2Ugc3lzdGVtPyAgSW4gTG9qYmFuLCBwb3NpdGlvbiBpcyBub3QgY2FzZSAtLSBubyBjb25zaXN0ZW50IG1lYW5pbmcvcm9sZSBhdHRhY2hlZCB0byBwb3NpdGlvbi4KSSBzdXNwZWN0IHRoaXMgaXMgYWxsIHBhcnQgb2YgdGhlIExvZ2phbSB0cmFkaXRpb24gb2YgbWlzdXNpbmcgdGVjaG5pY2FsIHdvcmRzLCBidXQgY2FuJ3QgcXVpdGUgZGVjaXBoZXIBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.203.696 References: <54186B05.1000802@lojban.org> <54216771.9060804@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1411477094.38293.YahooMailNeo@web181101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:58:14 -0700 From: "'John E Clifford' via lojban" Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Logos Initiative To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 216.39.62.56 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass header.i=@yahoo.com; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=yahoo.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: , X-Original-From: John E Clifford Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1013620071-1206374456-1411477094=:38293" X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - --1013620071-1206374456-1411477094=:38293 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Losing the thread here. But=20 English is a tonal language? Examples please. Positional case system? In Lojban, position is not case -- no consistent m= eaning/role attached to position. I suspect this is all part of the Logjam tradition of misusing technical wo= rds, but can't quite decipher what is meant here. btw, while I agree with & that Lojban is not a logical language, I think it= can be brought close enough with minimal effort (once that effort is allow= ed to be made) that it is more efficient to work to fix it than to start fr= om scratch (or even from scraps). On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 7:44 AM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: =20 2014-09-23 16:28 GMT+04:00 And Rosta : Gleki Arxokuna, On 16/09/2014 17:57: > > On 9/15/2014 11:14 AM, 'John E Clifford' via lojban wrote: >> Personally, though I am perfection-driven, I >> have decided that it is a better use of time and talent (a lot of= the >> one, a little of the other) to work with a nearly completed proje= ct in >> the hope that it will mange to get completed into a product that = is good >> enough (does all the crucial things, even if in sloppy, inefficie= nt, >> even ugly, ways). >> >>Provided both languages have a formal syntax and a clearly defined >>connection between the two dictionaries it won't matter a lot what >>language will be spoken since the machine translation will be 100% >>precise under such circumstances. >> >This is not even remotely true. First of all, the formal syntaxes would ha= ve to contain logical forms, which a formal syntax indeed should, but hardl= y any do (and Lojban's doesn't). I dont understand this. Once we know the place structure and the syntactic = tree in both languages, what can stop us? =20 Second, the "clearly defined connection" between the dictionaries would wor= k only if for each word in the one language there is a word in the other la= nguage that always translates it, and this one-to-one translation is explic= itly stated. The only way this is going to happen is if the two languages are deliberate= ly designed to be intertranslatable. > Since this project is/would be based on Loglan and Lojban then it is implie= d.=20 =20 >Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG, On 17/09/2014 15:40: > >On 9/16/2014 5:36 PM, TR NS wrote: >> >>If you want to attract people to this language you have to make it >>>so damn good that people can't help themselves. >>> >I agree with that. But I think nobody yet knows how to make it good enough= . More on this when I reply to the Engelang message. > > >Alas, what some of the tinkerers thing is "so damn good" is anything >>but to other people. >> >Broadly, Lojbanists fall into two groups. > >I. Those like, say, me, who know and care about logic and linguistics. >II. Those like, say, you, who don't know and don't care about logic and li= nguistics. > =20 I care about logic but since Lojban is fine with that the next important th= ing I care about is backward compatibility. If by some chance these heretic= s start breaking it once every two years then i will just stop doing any wo= rk here. I need a stable language. First think of a limited number of backward incompatible changes, vote for = them and freeze the language for not less than 20 years, and update the cor= pus of texts. If this is done i will approve of that. If not there is Logos= project. Let's not spoil the public image of lojban. If it's hard for you = or you accept that you wont be able to update the corpus and the textbooks = with ALL of your changes then i will never approve of that. first show the = result of your update, then we talk. there are enough errors in the corpus = to fix them with the current state of affairs. dont make things harder to s= olve. >History has shown a consensus among Group I. If you know and care about lo= gic and linguistics, then you are painfully conscious of Lojban's inadequac= ies and want a better language. If you don't know and care about logic and = linguistics, then change to Lojban seems gratuitous and you want the langua= ge to stay the same. The ideas for change coming from Group I seem like tin= kering only to those, like you, who don't understand them or the issues inv= olved. > >In the population in general, Group II is vastly larger than Group I, but = I have never been able to understand why people from Group II are attracted= to Lojban in the first place. Therefore I suppose, perhaps wrongly, that m= ost Lojbanists must fall into Group I and want something that actually is a= logical language, and therefore support a progressive rather than ultracon= servative position. > > >What will attract people is a body of other people actively using the >>language, materials published in the language, possibly including >>stuff not otherwise available (original works in Lojban). btw a single phrase in lojban is already ka'e not otherwise available and/o= r satisfactory translatable and thus can represent an original work. People >>USING the language, and not arguing about changes to it is what will >>make things seem "so damn good". You apparently don't realize how >>demoralizing it is to most people to read about yet another suggested >>change, and it is a turnoff simply to see changes being the primary >>discussion topic on the mailing list. "So damn good" necessarily has >> to mean "no one wants to keep tinkering with it". >> >But what happens -- as with current Lojban -- when people seeking a logica= l language -- snd ideally one with a speech community -- arrive and find th= at all those Lojbanists who actually understand the logicolinguistics issue= s agree that current Lojban is not fit for the purpose of being a logical l= anguage? It seems to me that they want the language to get fixed. People ar= rive and find discussion about change a disillusioning turn-off because it = reveals that Lojban advertises itself under false pretences; it is neither = complete nor a logical language. > i can see only complaints about positional case system but i need to write = a large complete explanation why it cant be otherwise so that people stop a= sking the same question over and over again with their minds blurred by an = allegedly universal to them case system of a limited number of natlangs the= y speak. I dont know what is proposed here. Seems like someone here just want to sta= rt a rant but doesnt know where to start so may be in lojbanistan, may be a= bout a language? >Forking would fix this, allowing people to vote with their feet. > > >I have looked at those. Any tonal language (IMHO) is doomed from the get >>>go. >>> >>That is probably because you aren't Chinese. And there are a lot more >>Chinese than English native speakers. >> > >There are more Chinese speakers than speakers of Basque, too. But, more re= levantly, there are more people who don't speak Chinese than people who do. english is a tonal language. i wonder if there are non tonal languages except lojban. > >--And. > > >--=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 = 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. > > --=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. --=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. --1013620071-1206374456-1411477094=:38293 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Losing the thread here.  But 
English is a tonal l= anguage?  Examples please.
Positional case system?  In Lojban, position is = not case -- no consistent meaning/role attached to position.
I suspect this i= s all part of the Logjam tradition of misusing technical words, but can't q= uite decipher what is meant here.
btw, while I agree with & that Lojban is not a = logical language, I think it can be brought close enough with minimal effor= t (once that effort is allowed to be made) that it is more efficient to wor= k to fix it than to start from scratch (or even from scraps).
=


<= div style=3D"font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial= , 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">
On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 7:44 AM, Gleki Arxo= kuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:


=


2014-09-23 16:28 GMT+04:0= 0 And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>:
Gleki Arxokuna, On 16/09/2014 17:57:
    On 9/15/2014 11:14 AM, 'John E Clifford' via lojban wrote:         Personally, though I am perfection-driven, I         have decided that it is a better use of time an= d talent (a lot of the
        one, a little of the other) to work with a near= ly completed project in
        the hope that it will mange to get completed in= to a product that is good
        enough (does all the crucial things, even if in= sloppy, inefficient,
        even ugly, ways).

Provided both languages have a formal syntax and a clearly defined
connection between the two dictionaries it won't matter a lot what
language will be spoken since the machine translation will be 100%
precise under such circumstances.

This is not even remotely true. First of all, the formal syntaxes would hav= e to contain logical forms, which a formal syntax indeed should, but hardly= any do (and Lojban's doesn't).
I dont understand this. On= ce we know the place structure and the syntactic tree in both languages, wh= at can stop us?
 
Secon= d, the "clearly defined connection" between the dictionaries would work onl= y if for each word in the one language there is a word in the other languag= e that always translates it, and this one-to-one translation is explicitly = stated.
The only way this is going to happen is if the two languages are deliberately designed to be in= tertranslatable.

Since this project is/would be based on Loglan and Lojban then it i= s implied. 

 

Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG, On 17/09/2014 15:40:
On 9/16/2014 5:36 PM, TR NS wrote:
If you want to attract people to this language you have to make it
so damn good that people can't help themselves.

I agree with that. But I think nobody yet knows how to make it good enough.= More on this when I reply to the Engelang message.

Alas, what some of the tinkerers thing is "so damn good" is anything
but to other people.

Broadly, Lojbanists fall into two groups.

I. Those like, say, me, who know and care about logic and linguistics.
II. Those like, say, you, who don't know and don't care about logic and lin= guistics.
 
I care about= logic but since Lojban is fine with that the next important thing I care a= bout is backward compatibility. If by some chance these heretics start brea= king it once every two years then i will just stop doing any work here.
I need a stable language.
First think of a limited number = of backward incompatible changes, vote for them and freeze the language for= not less than 20 years, and update the corpus of texts. If this is done i = will approve of that. If not there is Logos project. Let's not spoil the pu= blic image of lojban. If it's hard for you or you accept that you wont be a= ble to update the corpus and the textbooks with ALL of your changes then i = will never approve of that. first show the result of your update, then we t= alk. there are enough errors in the corpus to fix them with the current state of affairs. dont make things harder to solve.



History has shown a consensus among Group I. If you know and care about log= ic and linguistics, then you are painfully conscious of Lojban's inadequaci= es and want a better language. If you don't know and care about logic and l= inguistics, then change to Lojban seems gratuitous and you want the languag= e to stay the same. The ideas for change coming from Group I seem like tink= ering only to those, like you, who don't understand them or the issues invo= lved.

In the population in general, Group II is vastly larger than Group I, but I= have never been able to understand why people from Group II are attracted = to Lojban in the first place. Therefore I suppose, perhaps wrongly, that mo= st Lojbanists must fall into Group I and want something that actually is a = logical language, and therefore support a progressive rather than ultracons= ervative position.

What will attract people is a body of other people actively using the
language, materials published in the language, possibly including
stuff not otherwise available (original works in Lojban).
btw a single phrase in lojban is already ka'e not other= wise available and/or satisfactory translatable and thus can represent an o= riginal work.

People USING the language, and not arguing about changes to it is what will
make things seem "so damn good". You apparently don't realize how
demoralizing it is to most people to read about yet another suggested
change, and it is a turnoff simply to see changes being the primary
discussion topic on the mailing list. "So damn good" necessarily has
 to mean "no one wants to keep tinkering with it".

But what happens -- as with current Lojban -- when people seeking a logical= language -- snd ideally one with a speech community -- arrive and find tha= t all those Lojbanists who actually understand the logicolinguistics issues= agree that current Lojban is not fit for the purpose of being a logical la= nguage? It seems to me that they want the language to get fixed. People arr= ive and find discussion about change a disillusioning turn-off because it r= eveals that Lojban advertises itself under false pretences; it is neither c= omplete nor a logical language.

i can see only complaints about positional case syst= em but i need to write a large complete explanation why it cant be otherwis= e so that people stop asking the same question over and over again with the= ir minds blurred by an allegedly universal to them case system of a limited= number of natlangs they speak.

I dont know what is proposed here. Seems like someone here just want to star= t a rant but doesnt know where to start so may be in lojbanistan, may be ab= out a language?


Forking would fix this, allowing people to vote with their feet.

I have looked at those. Any tonal language (IMHO) is doomed from the get go.

That is probably because you aren't Chinese. And there are a lot more
Chinese than English native speakers.


There are more Chinese speakers than speakers of Basque, too. But, more rel= evantly, there are more people who don't speak Chinese than people who do.<= /blockquote>

english is a tonal language.=
i wonder if there are non tonal languages except lojban.



--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 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/<= u>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 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/o= ptout.


--
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.
--1013620071-1206374456-1411477094=:38293--