Received: from mail-yb1-f192.google.com ([209.85.219.192]:50567) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jNXGw-0000wn-EB for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 00:43:20 -0700 Received: by mail-yb1-f192.google.com with SMTP id 5sf8192932ybj.17 for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 00:43:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=HwvyxNQwv5Kvs4jVbAMjjEIksfjih9GRSwuan5Rk7AA=; b=jVdGmcWZOtWkApoyqw8OM3fh0O95hZpsjEY9Vv5Ico0K6JzZ7WSQ0kQE2QHIJX/Evb SLwswxGQ9rkmWmm4OY/22WoeyegDN6wWhZfgWL3wAKf0BCiHa/Rwly17KKQJVwX9KOwg hx2n8DwR+wsDlZarrYs5LVS21i5LToyhGyUUCkJ9wx4um82N50ijPK7lTO7GlvC2C7qF aq172sBtirv7cH0nyxwzVbE1NawLmPwD4Nw0zfQhMdYcqOc0RKv5++TOfp996ibFl73x 8kyP/rzDrfPA4XAL00Xj+YDELNJeuo3+wQ3s7gYKbHkYsQZLDfbF0pi9+Kls12xKOw4f oLFw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=HwvyxNQwv5Kvs4jVbAMjjEIksfjih9GRSwuan5Rk7AA=; b=rhtKwH6UFKYLr1wNdaP43mnS1ma5vuqUjg6HHYRh+BZff4VxE0Lch0KCUm2+Jvj4nO J2LixXc82Al3zPFphQPTFGINt4RfGCUrQahOt1nk/B09mJBZCUyMzOKz7XGAsktZlfkX S2Ul1yEAi5VPKAiKXLP7Aob1RVmKOr8lXb24XTlrWMXgwrw+NGHhFplsXLn07SNrjdQH ls2a2D0ld2vgQvde0kZtvZ2ZDasFNRJ+DR8rchotEA126M0rH8OMmeKO/xgWOPFaWHpE rswvGFIYqYE8Gp/wrv3jQnLs7jwAC5zPHLBN+S6b+BgMLdsvhJBAvebe/EiZavc1bvyM 6VOw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=sender:x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=HwvyxNQwv5Kvs4jVbAMjjEIksfjih9GRSwuan5Rk7AA=; b=QvKKiQZUMZUaGiD4XXqRnGaFsmbMub4+yys2HbRtFdcvvnl1bWiecRjmGvvS88z4wg 6v2ha8MEraiYqmZsODPiLLG9dbVwkXumA2DzPFR7TwBpUqWhRzhecI0Gvkl9FTIbR9QP SYt/AKrErL6T/K1Y2iHNp1MoaNI4OhkGv/oSD6naXbHirlfRBuehH40rZqLDzj0oYQs3 CnxoAS6QaMGHjrSA9ULhLKK+uh5BxQLmGbMZju37wj5eN9WI41aqsmPLSluL3jVnb5vL bMmWOJNsAldxI4h4OVv6bfry0B3nALgUQIkDb66l76fOenjfXtE0DAgiwEsjdxLwg2FZ /KsQ== Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubFPxPPFw/qEBswTc6ZAaUNDeIF9eFKOuyd4OcKzyUxlZe3P9TM R9du9AWPOFiBjFwqsN/mo9w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLmwu18WiZMqIHHI416zphTf4erotKUHtFXb3hqXg2lRnfU1BqQ+E2Z6SCRZWzTzPdjW2oanA== X-Received: by 2002:a25:4241:: with SMTP id p62mr18652437yba.242.1586677392255; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 00:43:12 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:a25:dcf:: with SMTP id 198ls7135563ybn.8.gmail; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 00:43:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a25:d80e:: with SMTP id p14mr18592553ybg.493.1586677391186; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 00:43:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 00:43:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Gleki Arxokuna To: lojban Message-Id: <59cebb85-184c-49ed-9556-438ca75de05f@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: References: <18776223.2757089.1586622570213.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <18776223.2757089.1586622570213@mail.yahoo.com> <6fe62be6-21b6-40b7-98b6-0f4e0072df47@googlegroups.com> <8eb60e09-2aa3-4e14-b37e-f716ea06ecfe@googlegroups.com> <1137a1b7-cd6f-4c7c-b2cc-f38e8b4abb3f@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Why Lojban fails MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_789_89666333.1586677390505" X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Spam-Checked-In-Group: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_bar: -- ------=_Part_789_89666333.1586677390505 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_790_1983302914.1586677390505" ------=_Part_790_1983302914.1586677390505 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 01:53:05 UTC+3, uakci escreveu: > > (snip)=20 > >> It doesn't really work that well, so there is a problem. >>> >> If the thing is speakable then it works.=20 >> > > But do we want to go with the bare minimum? Since we've already got it,= =20 > why not advance? > =20 > >> >>> Unless this is not what one was intending it to work. >>>> >>> >>> I'm not sure I grok this sentence. As I've said before, there's the=20 >>> issue of overengineering. Sure, I can speak the bloated variants of Loj= ban,=20 >>> but why should I if there are better solutions at reach? (Zantufa, Toaq= ,=20 >>> Xorban are all examples of great non-overengineered work.) >>> >> >> Some person may say: the first Hilbert operator is bi'u, the second one= =20 >> is lo'o'o'o'o'u and then another person would come and say: no, you misr= ead=20 >> Hilbert so that's how I think it should work and hereby I propose=20 >> lo'o'o'o'ou >> >> I don't know what is better here and who are the judges. >> > > Time is the perfect judge. The Loglandic adage =E2=80=98Usage will decide= =E2=80=99 shows=20 > this very well: some features surface and some sink to the bottom. But=20 > because of things like the Big Freeze and the covert stigmatization of=20 > deviations from the official dialect that still lasts, there's no room fo= r=20 > that happening. Instead, those who have the good ideas have to restrict= =20 > themselves to using them in their private circles because any attempt at= =20 > bringing them into the official language are met with dissent and dismay. > =20 > >> Lojban even if failed elsewhere shines here in it's stability. >> > > Latin, too, is a stable language. But it's been long abandoned, for=20 > Romance languages had sprung about. The only reason some people learn Lat= in=20 > is for academic purposes, since it has a great share in the body of=20 > scientific works our world has produced. > Latin is a live language btw. As the CLL puts it creation of new words is encouraged. > Do you think Lojban deserves the sort of treatment that languages we=20 > already know are quite dead get? > =20 > >> >> >>> And since Lojban is 35 years old and itself heavily borrowing from a=20 >>> 65-year-old language, it might be time to *remove* rather than *amend*.= One=20 >>> example: solpahi's connective system works just as well as the current = one=20 >>> =E2=80=94 which may have had to be this way due to YACC's limitations = =E2=80=94 but offers=20 >>> less bloat.=20 >>> >> >> I feel no bloat in it at all but backward incompatibility as a drawback.= =20 >> > > Languages change regardless of backward compatibility. No solution is=20 > truly future-proof; the only approach that guarantees success is to embra= ce=20 > change. Dismissing change on grounds of there being change in the first= =20 > place is, in my opinion, hilariously wrong =E2=80=94 then if you're so pa= ssionate=20 > about keeping the language in its current form, why not declare it to be = a=20 > success and, most importantly, move on to more important things in our=20 > lives? > I don't consider any notion of "success" for Lojban as being important. No= =20 teleology sorry. =20 > >> So if we want simplicity=20 >>> >> >> Then we should speak English. Or toki pona (depending on the meaning of= =20 >> the word "simple") >> > > English is far from simple, as you might have learned. > > Please don't just derail the conversation like that. We're talking about= =20 > improving Lojban, not replacing it with Toki Pona or Georgian. > =20 > >> =20 >> >>> and straightforwardness, why don't we choose simplicity and=20 >>> straightforwardness if, again, it's within arm's reach? >>> >> >> Because there are also aspiring students within arm's reach. >> > > The aspiring students who are within arm's reach don't know what they're= =20 > setting themselves up for. > > If I'd known I'd be joining a community like the one we have which gives= =20 > the language in its current form this much phrase, I'd never have taken u= p=20 > the offer. > =20 > >> You learned something, good to you. >> > > Please leave the condescending comments on your side of the screen. > =20 > >> Now create a copy of the database and test your crud operations on it so= =20 >> that new learners can have python2 final version now and forever. >> > > Isn't that=E2=80=A6 like=E2=80=A6 the opposite of what I want and the exa= ct statement of=20 > what you want? > Sure. You are trying to change and change and change the language so that= =20 new learners will never catch up=20 > > =E2=80=94 M=E1=BB=89 H=E1=BB=8Fash=C4=AB j=C3=AD ka. > --=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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/= lojban/59cebb85-184c-49ed-9556-438ca75de05f%40googlegroups.com. ------=_Part_790_1983302914.1586677390505 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 01:53:05 UTC+3, ua= kci escreveu:
(snip)
It doesn&= #39;t really work that well, so there is a problem.
If the thing is speakable then it works.

But do we want to go with the bare minimum? = Since we've already got it, why not advance?
=C2=A0
=

Unless this is not what one was intending= it to work.

I'm not sure I= grok this sentence. As I've said before, there's the issue of over= engineering. Sure, I can speak the bloated variants of Lojban, but why shou= ld I if there are better solutions at reach? (Zantufa, Toaq, Xorban are all= examples of great non-overengineered work.)
=

Some person may say: the first Hilbert operator is bi&#= 39;u, the second one is lo'o'o'o'o'u and then another p= erson would come and say: no, you misread Hilbert so that's how I think= it should work and hereby I propose lo'o'o'o'ou
=
I don't know what is better here and who are the judges.=

Time is the perfect judge. The= Loglandic adage =E2=80=98Usage will decide=E2=80=99 shows this very well: = some features surface and some sink to the bottom. But because of things li= ke the Big Freeze and the covert stigmatization of deviations from the offi= cial dialect that still lasts, there's no room for that happening. Inst= ead, those who have the good ideas have to restrict themselves to using the= m in their private circles because any attempt at bringing them into the of= ficial language are met with dissent and dismay.
=C2=A0
=
Loj= ban even if failed elsewhere shines here in it's stability.
=

Latin, too, is a stable language. But it&#= 39;s been long abandoned, for Romance languages had sprung about. The only = reason some people learn Latin is for academic purposes, since it has a gre= at share in the body of scientific works our world has produced.

Latin is a live language=C2=A0 btw.=
As the CLL puts it creation of new words is encouraged.

<= div class=3D"gmail_quote">

Do you think Lojban deserves = the sort of treatment that languages we already know are quite dead get?
=C2=A0
<= div dir=3D"ltr">


And s= ince Lojban is 35 years old and itself heavily borrowing from a 65-year-old= language, it might be time to *remove* rather than *amend*. One example: s= olpahi's connective system works just as well as the current one =E2=80= =94 which may have had to be this way due to YACC's limitations =E2=80= =94 but offers less bloat.

I feel no bloat in it at all but backward incompatibility as a drawback.= =C2=A0

Languages change regardl= ess of backward compatibility. No solution is truly future-proof; the only = approach that guarantees success is to embrace change. Dismissing change on= grounds of there being change in the first place is, in my opinion, hilari= ously wrong =E2=80=94 then if you're so passionate about keeping the la= nguage in its current form, why not declare it to be a success and, most im= portantly, move on to more important things in our lives?
I don't consider any notion of "success"= ; for Lojban as being important. No teleology sorry.

=C2=A0
So if we want simpl= icity

Then we should spe= ak English. Or toki pona (depending on the meaning of the word "simple= ")

English is far from sim= ple, as you might have learned.

Please don't j= ust derail the conversation like that. We're talking about improving Lo= jban, not replacing it with Toki Pona or Georgian.
=C2=A0
= =C2=A0
and straightforwardness, why don't = we choose simplicity and straightforwardness if, again, it's within arm= 's reach?

Because the= re are also aspiring students within arm's reach.

The aspiring students who are within arm's reach= don't know what they're setting themselves up for.

<= /div>
If I'd known I'd be joining a community like the one we h= ave which gives the language in its current form this much phrase, I'd = never have taken up the offer.
=C2=A0
You learned something, go= od to you.

Please leave the= condescending comments on your side of the screen.
=C2=A0
= Now create a copy of the database and test your crud operations on it so th= at new learners can have python2 final version now and forever.
=

Isn't that=E2=80=A6 like=E2=80=A6 the = opposite of what I want and the exact statement of what you want?
Sure. You are trying to change and change and cha= nge the language so that new learners will never catch up=C2=A0

=E2=80=94 M=E1=BB=89 H=E1=BB=8Fash=C4=AB j=C3= =AD ka.

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lo= jban/59cebb85-184c-49ed-9556-438ca75de05f%40googlegroups.com.
------=_Part_790_1983302914.1586677390505-- ------=_Part_789_89666333.1586677390505--