Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of maikxlx@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::32c as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::32c;
MIME-Version: 1.0
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>
 <CAEMeEWEz+=eYHtryxzbzc_ouKonhSNUKuo2pxe5sK8g9a5cFrA@mail.gmail.com> <CAEMeEWFjCQF_xO3_yvTkb5u+YtfRtXykRyU_kPy3KaeRPKjugA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEMeEWFjCQF_xO3_yvTkb5u+YtfRtXykRyU_kPy3KaeRPKjugA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Mike S." <maikxlx@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 11:23:53 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOYwWb1XgXJ1gPsActH8Zk0fEymjRszz9zsvNTC3030U9YOr8A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Why Lojban fails
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000012ff5d05a45b6c10"
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: --

--00000000000012ff5d05a45b6c10
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 4:32 PM H. Task <selguha@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello, Mike. I was wondering if you had links to the late Mr. May's
> original morphology proposal from the '80s. The material on his Ceqli
> website is pretty disorganized and patchy.
>

Ceqli wasn't published as its own language until 1996 or so, but the basic
gist of Ceqli's morphology was conceived in the 1980s as a proposed reform
of Loglan. The earliest existing version of May's proposal that I am aware
of is found on the Lognet (Loglan periodical) archives:

http://www.loglan.org/Articles2/critique-of-Loglan-morphology2.html

Unfortunately Part 1 of May's critique of Loglan is missing.  If anyone has
the old Lognet issues, it would be nice to get them published online.

Notice that James Cooke Brown responded by calling May's work "Rexlan" and
making a long-winded reply amounting to "here's why everything is fine the
way it is".

http://www.loglan.org/Articles2/defense-of-Loglan-morphology2.html


>
> I have been working for a while on simplifying loglan morphology without
> sacrificing phonological averageness. That is, I believe that the loglans
> (including Ceqli) are all unnecessarily stilted in their morphological
> design, resulting in languages that appear more alien, and put more
> cumbersome limits on word shape, than they have to.
>

I don't know what you have in mind, but there are many, many possible ways
to achieve morphological self-segregation. I have invented a couple novel
designs myself, one that uses high and low tones to mark morpheme
boundaries, and another whose details I have not publicized yet.

It's subjective, but I tend to agree that Ceqli's rules for starting all
morphemes with obstruents starts to feel monotonous after a while, but it's
still interesting because it's so very simple and such a stark contrast
with Loglan/Lojban, which is so morphologically complicated.  Luckily there
is ample room for middle approaches.


>
> Thanks,
> H.T.
>

-Mike
-Mike <http://loglang.wordpress.com/>


On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:15 AM H. Task <selguha@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: H. Task <selguha@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 16:31
> Subject: Re: [lojban] Why Lojban fails
> To: <maikxlx@gmail.com>
>
>
> Hello, Mike. I was wondering if you had links to the late Mr. May's
> original morphology proposal from the '80s. The material on his Ceqli
> website is pretty disorganized and patchy.
>
> I have been working for a while on simplifying loglan morphology without
> sacrificing phonological averageness. That is, I believe that the loglans
> (including Ceqli) are all unnecessarily stilted in their morphological
> design, resulting in languages that appear more alien, and put more
> cumbersome limits on word shape, than they have to.
>
> Thanks,
> H.T.
>
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020, 11:01 Mike S. <maikxlx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> 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
>>> not achieve its goal as presently constituted.  I learn (I=E2=80=99ve b=
een away a
>>> while) Lojbanists (of some sort or other or maybe all) no longer car ab=
out
>>> its primary goal, monoparsing, but are concerned to make a viable langu=
age
>>> out of the scraps.
>>>
>>
>> Do you have evidence that the Lojbanist community as a whole has
>> abandoned the goal of "monoparsing" (which I take to mean self-segregati=
ng
>> morphology and unambiguous grammar)?  There may be a couple people who f=
eel
>> it's unimportant, but in my experience, if you leave out a {ku}, you *wi=
ll*
>> be corrected.  As far as I am aware, *all* of the experimental parsers a=
nd
>> *all* of the major reform proposals, e.g. as Solpahi's connective reform=
,
>> honor monoparsing (they simply rely on >1 lookahead).  I am not sure why
>> you believe that Lojbanists no longer care about monoparsing.  The oppos=
ite
>> is true, as far as I can tell.
>>
>> As far as your words "[Lojban's] primary goal, monoparsing" -- that's to
>> me like saying "a house's primary goal, having a stable foundation".  In=
 my
>> view, the primary goal of a logical language is to have a formal semanti=
cs,
>> 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 is a requireme=
nt
>> for that.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>>  In the past, all the grotesqueries of Lojban morphology and grammar co=
uld
>>> be justified as necessary for the Great Goal.  But now that that Goal i=
s
>>> gone, they merely constitute needless complexities that make learning t=
he
>>> language even harder.  Stripping away the 47 kinds of commas (and God
>>> forbid you should use the wrong one, even though it no longer makes a
>>> crucial difference) (=E2=80=9947=E2=80=99 is merely a ridiculously larg=
e number, not meant
>>> to be accurate) would make the language easier to learn and do that
>>> systematically for all the word classes would eventually get to somethi=
ng
>>> manageable. But there would still be no reason 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.
>>>
>>
>> Let's be honest.  Rex May showed in the 1980s that the unambiguous
>> morphology could be made not only simpler but *extremely* simpler, and b=
oth
>> the makers of Xorban and the grossly underrated Richard Morneau showed t=
hat
>> the unambiguous grammar could be made not only simpler but *extremely*
>> simpler.  Lojban is based on a rather clumsy (though original and
>> interesting and exciting in 1960) prototype clumsily complexified by
>> decades of patches upon patches.  I guess people stick with it because i=
t
>> has something the other languages do not have (namely a history and a
>> community), though that may eventually change.  Already Toaq has an acti=
ve
>> user community and I predict other languages will be coming online in th=
e
>> next few years.  But I also predict the Lojban community will continue t=
o
>> exist.
>>
>>
>>
>>> If I counted right, there are at least nine version of Lojban floating
>>> around with adherents.  The winnowing process is presumably already at =
work
>>> and some of these are close to languages of one grumpy guy in a garret.
>>> Some have people in LLG offices (big whoop!).  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?  Nothing, really.  So, they will=
 all
>>> fade away (the LLG section running on on inertia).
>>> I recommend that all of you take a weekend off and learn toki pona
>>> (maybe start Friday night and leave a little time over breakfast on
>>> Monday). You will have a new language with a purpose (you can choose fr=
om
>>> half a dozen at least).  And you don=E2=80=99t lose the rights to const=
antly snipe
>>> at tiny infractions by your colinguals and to get into abstruse debate
>>> about 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
>> soon.  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 ter=
ms
>> of usability ("just don't have words!" -- wow, brilliant idea, Sonya; th=
at
>> solves everything), and certainly does not represent a satisfactory
>> language for those of us seeking a better logical language.
>>
>> -Mike
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group=
s
>> "lojban" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a=
n
>> email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/CAOYwWb1u3HfzkLk%3DWK3OM%3D1qxa=
9kMMmJvzbm_cKH7h%2BpEAdyaA%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/CAOYwWb1u3HfzkLk%3DWK3OM%3D1qx=
a9kMMmJvzbm_cKH7h%2BpEAdyaA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=
=3Dfooter>
>> .
>>
> --
> 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 view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/CAEMeEWFjCQF_xO3_yvTkb5u%2BYtfRt=
XykRyU_kPy3KaeRPKjugA%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/CAEMeEWFjCQF_xO3_yvTkb5u%2BYtfR=
tXykRyU_kPy3KaeRPKjugA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfoo=
ter>
> .
>

--=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/CAOYwWb1XgXJ1gPsActH8Zk0fEymjRszz9zsvNTC3030U9YOr8A%40mail.gmail.com=
.

--00000000000012ff5d05a45b6c10
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><span class=3D"gmail-im"><div dir=3D"ltr"=
 class=3D"gmail_attr">On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 4:32 PM H. Task &lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:selguha@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">selguha@gmail.com</a>&gt; w=
rote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p=
x 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=
=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"auto">Hello,
 Mike. I was wondering if you had links to the late Mr. May&#39;s original=
=20
morphology proposal from the &#39;80s. The material on his Ceqli website is=
=20
pretty disorganized and patchy.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></sp=
an><div>Ceqli
 wasn&#39;t published as its own language until 1996 or so, but the basic=
=20
gist of Ceqli&#39;s morphology was conceived in the 1980s as a proposed=20
reform of Loglan. The earliest existing version of May&#39;s proposal that =
I
 am aware of is found on the Lognet (Loglan periodical) archives:<br><br><a=
 href=3D"http://www.loglan.org/Articles2/critique-of-Loglan-morphology2.htm=
l" target=3D"_blank">http://www.loglan.org/Articles2/critique-of-Loglan-mor=
phology2.html</a><br><br></div><div>Unfortunately
 Part  1 of May&#39;s critique of Loglan is missing.=C2=A0 If anyone has th=
e old=20
Lognet issues, it would be nice to get them published online.<br></div><div=
><br></div><div>Notice
 that James Cooke Brown responded by calling May&#39;s work &quot;Rexlan&qu=
ot; and=20
making a long-winded reply amounting to &quot;here&#39;s why everything is =
fine=20
the way it is&quot;.<br><br><a href=3D"http://www.loglan.org/Articles2/defe=
nse-of-Loglan-morphology2.html" target=3D"_blank">http://www.loglan.org/Art=
icles2/defense-of-Loglan-morphology2.html</a><br></div><span class=3D"gmail=
-im"><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px=
 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><di=
v dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">I
 have been working for a while on simplifying loglan morphology without=20
sacrificing phonological averageness. That is, I believe that the=20
loglans (including Ceqli) are all unnecessarily=C2=A0stilted in their=20
morphological design, resulting in languages that appear more alien, and
 put more cumbersome limits on word shape, than they have to.</div></div></=
blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>I
 don&#39;t know what you have in mind, but there are many, many possible=20
ways to achieve morphological self-segregation. I have invented a couple
 novel designs myself, one that uses high and low tones to mark morpheme
 boundaries, and another whose details I have not publicized yet.<br><br>It=
&#39;s
 subjective, but I tend to agree that Ceqli&#39;s rules for starting all=20
morphemes with obstruents starts to feel monotonous after a while, but=20
it&#39;s still interesting because it&#39;s so very simple and such a stark=
=20
contrast with Loglan/Lojban, which is so morphologically complicated.=C2=A0=
=20
Luckily there is ample room for middle approaches.<br></div><div><br>=C2=A0=
</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;b=
order-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto"><=
div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Thanks,</div><div dir=3D"auto"=
>H.T.</div></div></blockquote><font color=3D"#888888"><div><br>-Mike</div><=
/font><div><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div=
>-Mike<a href=3D"http://loglang.wordpress.com/" target=3D"_blank"></a> <br>=
</div></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div=
 dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:15 AM H. Task =
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:selguha@gmail.com">selguha@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<b=
r></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex=
;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto"=
><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_at=
tr">---------- Forwarded message ---------<br>From: <strong class=3D"gmail_=
sendername" dir=3D"auto">H. Task</strong> <span dir=3D"auto">&lt;<a href=3D=
"mailto:selguha@gmail.com" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">selguha@gma=
il.com</a>&gt;</span><br>Date: Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 16:31<br>Subject: Re: [lo=
jban] Why Lojban fails<br>To:  &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:maikxlx@gmail.com" rel=
=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">maikxlx@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br></div><br><b=
r><div dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"auto">Hello, Mike. I was wondering if you h=
ad links to the late Mr. May&#39;s original morphology proposal from the &#=
39;80s. The material on his Ceqli website is pretty disorganized and patchy=
.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">I have been working fo=
r a while on simplifying loglan morphology without sacrificing phonological=
 averageness. That is, I believe that the loglans (including Ceqli) are all=
 unnecessarily=C2=A0stilted in their morphological design, resulting in lan=
guages that appear more alien, and put more cumbersome limits on word shape=
, than they have to.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Tha=
nks,</div><div dir=3D"auto">H.T.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div clas=
s=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Sun, Apr 12, 202=
0, 11:01 Mike S. &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:maikxlx@gmail.com" rel=3D"noreferrer=
 noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">maikxlx@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<=
br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8e=
x;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"=
><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div d=
ir=3D"ltr"></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"g=
mail_attr">On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 9:55 AM &#39;John E Clifford&#39; via lo=
jban &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com" rel=3D"noreferrer noref=
errer noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>&=
gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>=
<div style=3D"font-family:Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-si=
ze: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 I learn (I=E2=80=99ve been away a while) Lojbanists (of some sort or ot=
her or maybe all) no longer car about its primary goal, monoparsing, but ar=
e 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 com=
munity as a whole has abandoned the goal of &quot;monoparsing&quot; (which =
I take to mean self-segregating morphology and unambiguous grammar)?=C2=A0 =
There may be a couple people who feel it&#39;s unimportant, but in my exper=
ience, 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 the major reform p=
roposals, e.g. as Solpahi&#39;s connective reform, honor monoparsing (they =
simply rely on &gt;1 lookahead).=C2=A0 I am not sure why you believe that L=
ojbanists no longer care about monoparsing.=C2=A0 The opposite 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 like saying &quot;a=
 house&#39;s primary goal, having a stable foundation&quot;.=C2=A0 In my vi=
ew, the primary goal of a logical language is to have a formal semantics, a=
nd 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 is a requirement =
for that.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote 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:Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,sa=
ns-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 mon=
parsing, what reason is there to continue working on it or learning it?=E2=
=80=9D =C2=A0In the past, all the grotesqueries of Lojban morphology and gr=
ammar could be justified as necessary for the Great Goal.=C2=A0 But now tha=
t that Goal is gone, they merely constitute needless complexities that make=
 learning the language even harder.=C2=A0 Stripping away the 47 kinds of co=
mmas (and God forbid you should use the wrong one, even though 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 language easier to =
learn and do that systematically for all the word classes would eventually =
get to something manageable. But there would still be no reason to learn it=
, because it doesn=E2=80=99t do anything that English (etc.) doesn=E2=80=99=
t do, nor do it in a novel and revealing way.<br></div></div></div></blockq=
uote><div><br></div><div>Let&#39;s be honest.=C2=A0 Rex May showed in the 1=
980s that the unambiguous morphology could be made not only simpler but *ex=
tremely* simpler, and both the makers of Xorban and the grossly 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) prototype clumsily co=
mplexified by decades of patches upon patches.=C2=A0 I guess people stick w=
ith it because it has something the other languages do not have (namely a h=
istory and a community), though that may eventually change.=C2=A0 Already T=
oaq has an active user community and I predict other languages will be comi=
ng online in the next few years.=C2=A0 But I also predict the Lojban commun=
ity will continue to exist.<br><br>=C2=A0<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 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 presumably already a=
t work and some of these are close to languages of one grumpy guy in a garr=
et.=C2=A0 Some have people in LLG offices (big whoop!).=C2=A0 Some have dec=
ent sized (say 12) groups here and there. What can any of these offer to ne=
wbies or possible converts to get them to join?=C2=A0 Nothing, really.=C2=
=A0 So, they will all fade away (the LLG section running on on inertia).</d=
iv><div dir=3D"ltr">I recommend that all of you take a weekend off and lear=
n toki pona (maybe start Friday night and leave a little time over breakfas=
t on Monday). You will have a new language with a purpose (you can choose f=
rom 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 abs=
truse 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 will not be jump=
ing on the Toki Pona parlor-game bandwagon any time soon.=C2=A0 Toki Pona i=
s ridiculously overhyped and grossly overrated in my opinion, is full of it=
s own problems, is a total joke and cop-out in terms of usability (&quot;ju=
st don&#39;t have words!&quot; -- wow, brilliant idea, Sonya; that solves e=
verything), and certainly does not represent a satisfactory language for th=
ose of us seeking a better logical language. <br><br></div><div>-Mike<br></=
div><br></div></div></div></div></div></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" rel=3D"noref=
errer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">lojban+unsubscrib=
e@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msgid/lojban/CAOYwWb1u3HfzkLk%3DWK3OM%3D1qxa9kMMmJvzbm_cKH7h%2BpEAdyaA=
%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dfooter" rel=3D"norefe=
rrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://groups.goo=
gle.com/d/msgid/lojban/CAOYwWb1u3HfzkLk%3DWK3OM%3D1qxa9kMMmJvzbm_cKH7h%2BpE=
AdyaA%40mail.gmail.com</a>.<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div></div></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" target=3D"_b=
lank">lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msgid/lojban/CAEMeEWFjCQF_xO3_yvTkb5u%2BYtfRtXykRyU_kPy3KaeRPKjugA%40m=
ail.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dfooter" target=3D"_blank"=
>https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/CAEMeEWFjCQF_xO3_yvTkb5u%2BYtfRtX=
ykRyU_kPy3KaeRPKjugA%40mail.gmail.com</a>.<br>
</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/CAOYwWb1XgXJ1gPsActH8Zk0fEymjRszz9zsvNTC3030U9YOr8A%40mai=
l.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter">https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msgid/lojban/CAOYwWb1XgXJ1gPsActH8Zk0fEymjRszz9zsvNTC3030U9YOr8A%40mai=
l.gmail.com</a>.<br />

--00000000000012ff5d05a45b6c10--