Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 09:13:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban <lojban@googlegroups.com>
Message-Id: <2b1d68cd-3777-486c-be81-01e084438dcb@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOYwWb1u3HfzkLk=WK3OM=1qxa9kMMmJvzbm_cKH7h+pEAdyaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <18776223.2757089.1586622570213.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <18776223.2757089.1586622570213@mail.yahoo.com> <c29378ec-fcee-40c8-8c42-b0a807d85ddf@googlegroups.com>
 <CACtk4+C8FqtmCh22YyPcRPiAecFLf8TuHkz8ru-JiHKbbjkceg@mail.gmail.com>
 <6fe62be6-21b6-40b7-98b6-0f4e0072df47@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+BOX=1HLsDPpYnnF4F5udZYZW1L9n87bhWw6t4rwYzKhw@mail.gmail.com>
 <8eb60e09-2aa3-4e14-b37e-f716ea06ecfe@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+CQVWmW8_=i-t4nT01vLg9QsXebhCYGip8NqkvyD6enhg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1137a1b7-cd6f-4c7c-b2cc-f38e8b4abb3f@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+D0NF3ghV8wzD=oOv+ijrSiuNH3pgg5Ctn3JDMEO4nQxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <e00859fc-e0cf-44f2-9c1a-c6ae178f647e@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+D7EusQg-W1=0d0919aGZgVKVO2043A4ogiostyWXM5fQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <59cebb85-184c-49ed-9556-438ca75de05f@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+APMZbXATy1_xAUouvqxTiQr0sZ06x7XxmLJ-WBxVEWGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <f1e41358-15f6-469a-9623-11725854d112@googlegroups.com> <110320343.2935330.1586699696926@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAOYwWb1u3HfzkLk=WK3OM=1qxa9kMMmJvzbm_cKH7h+pEAdyaA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Why Lojban fails
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_965_1659836911.1586708019898"
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -2.6
X-Spam_score_int: -25
X-Spam_bar: --

------=_Part_965_1659836911.1586708019898
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_966_1511275628.1586708019898"

------=_Part_966_1511275628.1586708019898
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 18:01:38 UTC+3, Mike S. escreveu:
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 9:55 AM 'John E Clifford' via lojban <
> lojban@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh, my!  I merely meant to drop a friendly reminder that Lojban could no=
t=20
>> achieve its goal as presently constituted.  KI learn (I=E2=80=99ve been =
away a=20
>> while) Lojbanists (of some sort or other or maybe all) no longer car abo=
ut=20
>> its primary goal, monoparsing, but are concerned to make a viable langua=
ge=20
>> out of the scraps.
>>
>
> Do you have evidence that the Lojbanist community as a whole has abandone=
d=20
> the goal of "monoparsing" (which I take to mean self-segregating morpholo=
gy=20
> and unambiguous grammar)? =20
>

I have one. When I asked about inconsistencies in the PEG grammar I was=20
given an answer that some semantic parser should do that job. However, no=
=20
such parser was envisioned at that time. So yes, it's avoiding the topic of=
=20
not abandoning it at all.

Even within ordinary AST system there are no discussions of internal=20
grammar of UI or fu'e. It's a topic for geeks maybe that's the reason.
=20

> There may be a couple people who feel it's unimportant, but in my=20
> experience, if you leave out a {ku}, you *will* be corrected.  As far as =
I=20
> am aware, *all* of the experimental parsers and *all* of the major reform=
=20
> proposals, e.g. as Solpahi's connective reform, honor monoparsing (they=
=20
> simply rely on >1 lookahead).  I am not sure why you believe that=20
> Lojbanists no longer care about monoparsing.  The opposite is true, as fa=
r=20
> as I can tell.
>
> As far as your words "[Lojban's] primary goal, monoparsing" -- that's to=
=20
> me like saying "a house's primary goal, having a stable foundation".  In =
my=20
> view, the primary goal of a logical language is to have a formal semantic=
s,=20
> and a formal grammar is a requirement for that, just as the primary goal =
of=20
> a house is to be lived in, and having a stable foundation is a requiremen=
t=20
> for that.
> =20
>
>> =20
>> My immediate question is, =E2=80=9CGiven that Lojban no longer strives f=
or=20
>> monparsing, what reason is there to continue working on it or learning i=
t?=E2=80=9D=20
>>  In the past, all the grotesqueries of Lojban morphology and grammar cou=
ld=20
>> be justified as necessary for the Great Goal.  But now that that Goal is=
=20
>> gone, they merely constitute needless complexities that make learning th=
e=20
>> language even harder.  Stripping away the 47 kinds of commas (and God=20
>> forbid you should use the wrong one, even though it no longer makes a=20
>> crucial difference) (=E2=80=9947=E2=80=99 is merely a ridiculously large=
 number, not meant=20
>> to be accurate) would make the language easier to learn and do that=20
>> systematically for all the word classes would eventually get to somethin=
g=20
>> manageable. But there would still be no reason to learn it, because it=
=20
>> doesn=E2=80=99t do anything that English (etc.) doesn=E2=80=99t do, nor =
do it in a novel=20
>> and revealing way.
>>
>
> Let's be honest.  Rex May showed in the 1980s that the unambiguous=20
> morphology could be made not only simpler but *extremely* simpler, and bo=
th=20
> the makers of Xorban and the grossly underrated Richard Morneau showed th=
at=20
> the unambiguous grammar could be made not only simpler but *extremely*=20
> simpler.  Lojban is based on a rather clumsy (though original and=20
> interesting and exciting in 1960) prototype clumsily complexified by=20
> decades of patches upon patches.  I guess people stick with it because it=
=20
> has something the other languages do not have (namely a history and a=20
> community), though that may eventually change.  Already Toaq has an activ=
e=20
> user community and I predict other languages will be coming online in the=
=20
> next few years.  But I also predict the Lojban community will continue to=
=20
> exist.
>
> =20
>
>> If I counted right, there are at least nine version of Lojban floating=
=20
>> around with adherents.  The winnowing process is presumably already at w=
ork=20
>> and some of these are close to languages of one grumpy guy in a garret. =
=20
>> Some have people in LLG offices (big whoop!).  Some have decent sized (s=
ay=20
>> 12) groups here and there. What can any of these offer to newbies or=20
>> possible converts to get them to join?  Nothing, really.  So, they will =
all=20
>> fade away (the LLG section running on on inertia).
>> I recommend that all of you take a weekend off and learn toki pona (mayb=
e=20
>> start Friday night and leave a little time over breakfast on Monday). Yo=
u=20
>> will have a new language with a purpose (you can choose from half a doze=
n=20
>> at least).  And you don=E2=80=99t lose the rights to constantly snipe at=
 tiny=20
>> infractions by your colinguals and to get into abstruse debate about=20
>> details of grammar.  After all, I am in the middle of it.
>>
>
> I will not be jumping on the Toki Pona parlor-game bandwagon any time=20
> soon.  Toki Pona is ridiculously overhyped and grossly overrated in my=20
> opinion, is full of its own problems, is a total joke and cop-out in term=
s=20
> of usability ("just don't have words!" -- wow, brilliant idea, Sonya; tha=
t=20
> solves everything), and certainly does not represent a satisfactory=20
> language for those of us seeking a better logical language.=20
>
> -Mike
>
>

--=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/2b1d68cd-3777-486c-be81-01e084438dcb%40googlegroups.com.

------=_Part_966_1511275628.1586708019898
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><br>Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 18:01:38 UTC+3, Mi=
ke S.  escreveu:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin=
-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"lt=
r"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div=
 dir=3D"ltr"></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Sun, =
Apr 12, 2020 at 9:55 AM &#39;John E Clifford&#39; via lojban &lt;<a href=3D=
"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"nofollow" onmouse=
down=3D"this.href=3D&#39;mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com&#39;;return true;" =
onclick=3D"this.href=3D&#39;mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com&#39;;return true=
;">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gma=
il_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,2=
04,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div style=3D"font-family:Helvetica Neue,Hel=
vetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><div></div>
        <div dir=3D"ltr">Oh, my!=C2=A0 I merely meant to drop a friendly re=
minder that Lojban could not achieve its goal as presently constituted.=C2=
=A0 KI learn (I=E2=80=99ve been away a while) Lojbanists (of some sort or o=
ther or maybe all) no longer car about its primary goal, monoparsing, but a=
re concerned to make a viable language out of the scraps.</div></div></div>=
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Do you have evidence that the Lojbanist co=
mmunity as a whole has abandoned the goal of &quot;monoparsing&quot; (which=
 I take to mean self-segregating morphology and unambiguous grammar)?=C2=A0=
 </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div=
>I have one. When I asked about inconsistencies in the PEG grammar I was gi=
ven an answer that some semantic parser should do that job. However, no suc=
h parser was envisioned at that time. So yes, it&#39;s avoiding the topic o=
f not abandoning it at all.</div><div><br></div><div>Even within ordinary A=
ST system there are no discussions of internal grammar of UI or fu&#39;e. I=
t&#39;s a topic for geeks maybe that&#39;s the reason.</div><div>=C2=A0</di=
v><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;b=
order-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D=
"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmai=
l_quote"><div>There may be a couple people who feel it&#39;s unimportant, b=
ut in my experience, if you leave out a {ku}, you *will* be corrected.=C2=
=A0 As far as I am aware, *all* of the experimental parsers and *all* of th=
e major reform proposals, e.g. as Solpahi&#39;s connective reform, honor mo=
noparsing (they simply rely on &gt;1 lookahead).=C2=A0 I am not sure why yo=
u believe that Lojbanists no longer care about monoparsing.=C2=A0 The oppos=
ite is true, as far as I can tell.<br><br></div><div>As far as your words &=
quot;[Lojban&#39;s] primary goal, monoparsing&quot; -- that&#39;s to me lik=
e saying &quot;a house&#39;s primary goal, having a stable foundation&quot;=
.=C2=A0 In my view, the primary goal of a logical language is to have a for=
mal semantics, and a formal grammar is a requirement for that, just as the =
primary goal of a house is to be lived in, and having a stable foundation i=
s a requirement for that.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gm=
ail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,=
204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div style=3D"font-family:Helvetica Neue,He=
lvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><div dir=3D"ltr"> =C2=A0</div><div=
 dir=3D"ltr">My immediate question is, =E2=80=9CGiven that Lojban no longer=
 strives for monparsing, what reason is there to continue working on it or =
learning it?=E2=80=9D =C2=A0In the past, all the grotesqueries of Lojban mo=
rphology and grammar could be justified as necessary for the Great Goal.=C2=
=A0 But now that that Goal is gone, they merely constitute needless complex=
ities that make learning the language even harder.=C2=A0 Stripping away the=
 47 kinds of commas (and God forbid you should use the wrong one, even thou=
gh it no longer makes a crucial difference) (=E2=80=9947=E2=80=99 is merely=
 a ridiculously large number, not meant to be accurate) would make the lang=
uage easier to learn and do that systematically for all the word classes wo=
uld eventually get to something manageable. But there would still be no rea=
son to learn it, because it doesn=E2=80=99t do anything that English (etc.)=
 doesn=E2=80=99t do, nor do it in a novel and revealing way.<br></div></div=
></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Let&#39;s be honest.=C2=A0 Rex May =
showed in the 1980s that the unambiguous morphology could be made not only =
simpler but *extremely* simpler, and both the makers of Xorban and the gros=
sly underrated Richard Morneau showed that the unambiguous grammar could be=
 made not only simpler but *extremely* simpler.=C2=A0 Lojban is based on a =
rather clumsy (though original and interesting and exciting in 1960) protot=
ype clumsily complexified by decades of patches upon patches.=C2=A0 I guess=
 people stick with it because it has something the other languages do not h=
ave (namely a history and a community), though that may eventually change.=
=C2=A0 Already Toaq has an active user community and I predict other langua=
ges will be coming online in the next few years.=C2=A0 But I also predict t=
he Lojban community will continue to exist.<br><br>=C2=A0<br></div><blockqu=
ote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px=
 solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div style=3D"font-family:He=
lvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><div dir=3D"ltr"></=
div><div dir=3D"ltr">If I counted right, there are at least nine version of=
 Lojban floating around with adherents.=C2=A0 The winnowing process is pres=
umably already at work and some of these are close to languages of one grum=
py guy in a garret.=C2=A0 Some have people in LLG offices (big whoop!).=C2=
=A0 Some have decent sized (say 12) groups here and there. What can any of =
these offer to newbies or possible converts to get them to join?=C2=A0 Noth=
ing, really.=C2=A0 So, they will all fade away (the LLG section running on =
on inertia).</div><div dir=3D"ltr">I recommend that all of you take a weeke=
nd off and learn toki pona (maybe start Friday night and leave a little tim=
e over breakfast on Monday). You will have a new language with a purpose (y=
ou can choose from half a dozen at least).=C2=A0 And you don=E2=80=99t lose=
 the rights to constantly snipe at tiny infractions by your colinguals and =
to get into abstruse debate about details of grammar.=C2=A0 After all, I am=
 in the middle of it.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I w=
ill not be jumping on the Toki Pona parlor-game bandwagon any time soon.=C2=
=A0 Toki Pona is ridiculously overhyped and grossly overrated in my opinion=
, is full of its own problems, is a total joke and cop-out in terms of usab=
ility (&quot;just don&#39;t have words!&quot; -- wow, brilliant idea, Sonya=
; that solves everything), and certainly does not represent a satisfactory =
language for those of us seeking a better logical language. <br><br></div><=
div>-Mike<br></div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></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 view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msgid/lojban/2b1d68cd-3777-486c-be81-01e084438dcb%40googlegroups.com?u=
tm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lo=
jban/2b1d68cd-3777-486c-be81-01e084438dcb%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br />

------=_Part_966_1511275628.1586708019898--

------=_Part_965_1659836911.1586708019898--