Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.214 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.241.214;
Subject: Re: [lojban] sumti-raising cmavo thingy
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
References: <CACtk4+CbTR=SbyAM+5GLPz0kO52KHL3Th=XgrYXQsu200WFmNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <382ac694-c75e-46ab-9747-9dc02e35a7b0@googlegroups.com>
 <XZKA1t00x56Cr6M01ZKBkK>
From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" <lojbab@lojban.org>
Organization: The Logical Language Group, Inc.
Message-ID: <9589e32b-be09-3c2a-b931-4bb368b023b9@lojban.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:56:07 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <XZKA1t00x56Cr6M01ZKBkK>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -0.6
X-Spam_score_int: -5
X-Spam_bar: /

On 8/15/2016 4:18 PM, Bruno Panasiewicz wrote:
> That is or isn't the point, depending on the intentions of the
> proposers. I think that the main motive is to free up a spot in the now
> expensive short cmavo space. Simply, the uses of =C2=ABli=C2=BB and =C2=
=ABcu=C2=BB have no
> overlaps, so collapsing them is a good idea.

[large number of strongly negative attitudinals]

Why does "having no overlaps" make it "a good idea"?  The language is=20
Lojban, not Speedtalk".  And why those particular words; they are hardly=20
the least used short words in the language?

If one were going to collapse two words, one would probably want them as=20
similar as possible in meaning and usage..

This would be an incredibly bad idea, if only because of the relearning=20
penalty and the invalidation of almost thirty years of language use.  It=20
is that sort of arbitrary prescriptive change that I have fought most=20
strongly against.

And why is it necessary to free up a spot?  We are supposedly done with=20
the language design.  There should be no new cmavo unless they arise=20
through actual usage, and it is rather hard to imagine a usage arising=20
so useful as to suddenly and arbitrarily demand a short wordform.=20
Especially since no such need has arisen in 30 years.

But if such occurred there are other choices far better than jamming two=20
entirely unrelated functions into one word (something that was=20
explicitly designed OUT of the language).  Move a little-use 2 letter=20
cmavo out of that word space (or even eliminate it; e.g. de and di could=20
be replaced by da with a subscript).

Seriously considering this sort of change at this stage of the language,=20
is a good way to get lojbab to retire immediately and permanently.

lojbab


--=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 https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.