Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of ciuak.prog@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c09::229 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c09::229;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9589e32b-be09-3c2a-b931-4bb368b023b9@lojban.org>
References: <CACtk4+CbTR=SbyAM+5GLPz0kO52KHL3Th=XgrYXQsu200WFmNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <382ac694-c75e-46ab-9747-9dc02e35a7b0@googlegroups.com> <9589e32b-be09-3c2a-b931-4bb368b023b9@lojban.org>
From: Bruno Panasiewicz <ciuak.prog@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 08:19:06 +0200
Message-ID: <CACtk4+DLbyVwHo_unQVbqqJ7ans-0hDjHjTuAB7G7Jk-qGUq=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] sumti-raising cmavo thingy
To: mriste <lojban@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113fc050835915053a2a53a1
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.8
X-Spam_score_int: -17
X-Spam_bar: -

--001a113fc050835915053a2a53a1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Aug 16, 2016 1:55 AM, "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" <
lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>
> 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
Lojban, not Speedtalk".  And why those particular words; they are hardly
the least used short words in the language?
>
> If one were going to collapse two words, one would probably want them as
similar as possible in meaning and usage..
>
> This would be an incredibly bad idea, if only because of the relearning
penalty and the invalidation of almost thirty years of language use.  It is
that sort of arbitrary prescriptive change that I have fought most strongly
against.

I didn't say I'm with the proposal; I simply mentioned it. I agree it's a
not very good idea.

>
> And why is it necessary to free up a spot?  We are supposedly done with
the language design.  There should be no new cmavo unless they arise
through actual usage, and it is rather hard to imagine a usage arising so
useful as to suddenly and arbitrarily demand a short wordform. Especially
since no such need has arisen in 30 years.
>
> But if such occurred there are other choices far better than jamming two
entirely unrelated functions into one word (something that was explicitly
designed OUT of the language).  Move a little-use 2 letter cmavo out of
that word space (or even eliminate it; e.g. de and di could be replaced by
da with a subscript).
>
> Seriously considering this sort of change at this stage of the language,
is a good way to get lojbab to retire immediately and permanently.

.i ja'o do co'u se jibni vau .u'i

>
> lojbab

=E2=80=94 mi'e se cmene be zo uakci mu'o re'i =E2=80=94

--=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.

--001a113fc050835915053a2a53a1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr"></p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">On Aug 16, 2016 1:55 AM, &quot;Bob LeChevalier, President an=
d Founder - LLG&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:lojbab@lojban.org">lojbab@lojba=
n.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; On 8/15/2016 4:18 PM, Bruno Panasiewicz wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; That is or isn&#39;t the point, depending on the intentions of the=
<br>
&gt;&gt; proposers. I think that the main motive is to free up a spot in th=
e now<br>
&gt;&gt; expensive short cmavo space. Simply, the uses of =C2=ABli=C2=BB an=
d =C2=ABcu=C2=BB have no<br>
&gt;&gt; overlaps, so collapsing them is a good idea.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; [large number of strongly negative attitudinals]<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Why does &quot;having no overlaps&quot; make it &quot;a good idea&quot=
;?=C2=A0 The language is Lojban, not Speedtalk&quot;.=C2=A0 And why those p=
articular words; they are hardly the least used short words in the language=
?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; If one were going to collapse two words, one would probably want them =
as similar as possible in meaning and usage..<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; This would be an incredibly bad idea, if only because of the relearnin=
g penalty and the invalidation of almost thirty years of language use.=C2=
=A0 It is that sort of arbitrary prescriptive change that I have fought mos=
t strongly against.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">I didn&#39;t say I&#39;m with the proposal; I simply mention=
ed it. I agree it&#39;s a not very good idea.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&gt;<br>
&gt; And why is it necessary to free up a spot?=C2=A0 We are supposedly don=
e with the language design.=C2=A0 There should be no new cmavo unless they =
arise through actual usage, and it is rather hard to imagine a usage arisin=
g so useful as to suddenly and arbitrarily demand a short wordform. Especia=
lly since no such need has arisen in 30 years.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; But if such occurred there are other choices far better than jamming t=
wo entirely unrelated functions into one word (something that was explicitl=
y designed OUT of the language).=C2=A0 Move a little-use 2 letter cmavo out=
 of that word space (or even eliminate it; e.g. de and di could be replaced=
 by da with a subscript).<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Seriously considering this sort of change at this stage of the languag=
e, is a good way to get lojbab to retire immediately and permanently.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">.i ja&#39;o do co&#39;u se jibni vau .u&#39;i</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&gt;<br>
&gt; lojbab</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">=E2=80=94 mi&#39;e se cmene be zo uakci mu&#39;o re&#39;i =
=E2=80=94</p>

<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"https://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http=
s://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 />

--001a113fc050835915053a2a53a1--