From xod@thestonecutters.net Fri Jul 23 19:38:19 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:38:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thestonecutters.net ([63.251.19.112] helo=chert.thestonecutters.net) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BoCQO-0000Nd-1X for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:38:12 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (h-67-101-254-140.nycmny83.dynamic.covad.net [67.101.254.140]) by chert.thestonecutters.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E723C148002 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 17:23:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <41018691.8020605@thestonecutters.net> Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 17:43:45 -0400 From: xod User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.2 (Windows/20040707) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] [Fwd: Re: Projects] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed X-archive-position: 8309 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list reverendzow writes, and I forward: --- In lojban@yahoogroups.com, xod wrote: > reverendzow wrote: > > >What's a BPFK? I think such a change -could- happen, but to do so, > >the following would have to occur: Someone creates a new Lojban > >vocabulary that has major improvements over the current one (although > >this is not necessarily possible), then the existing (and relatively > >small as I understand it) Lojban community would need to be convinced > >that this new vocabulary was worth the work in switching. $0.02 > > > > > > > I'm imagining a goulash containing Esperantoid vocabulary (targetting > your preferred language group) and Lojbanic grammar. Do you expect this > would gain more traction than Esperanto, or would that level of success > satisfy you? Yeep! This is not the direction I want to go at all. The first thing to look into is the phonetic inventory - what sounds most people in the world can produce/distinguish, including computers' ability to recognize/distinguish these sounds. This would then be followed by a study of the most efficient methods of preventing vocal confusion (i.e., making word boundaries obvious), combined with a method of making the most commonly-used/useful words the shortest. Then we could generate the new vocabulary.