From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sun Oct 02 13:23:27 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 02 Oct 2005 13:23:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1EMAMd-0000zj-EQ for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 13:23:15 -0700 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1EMAMd-0000zX-2S for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 13:23:15 -0700 Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 13:23:15 -0700 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: {lo} down Message-ID: <20051002202314.GC14240@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <200510022116.58524.lojban@solipsys.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200510022116.58524.lojban@solipsys.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 10706 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 09:16:58PM +0100, lojban@solipsys.co.uk wrote: > > >> For someone who basically left the lojban project 8 years or > >> more ago because of this type of bickering > > > I'm curious to know, who are you? > > Charles Babbage, in his essay "Decline of Science in England" > wrote > > " If a fact is to be established by testimony, anonymous > assertion is of no value; if it can be proved, by evidence to > which the public have access, it is of no consequence (for the > cause of truth) who produces it. A matter of opinion derives > weight from the name which is attached to it; but a chain of > reasoning is equally conclusive, whoever may be its author. " Is that relevant in some way? He didn't say "I won't care what you say until you prove you're worthy to say it", he simply said he was curious. > > I guess back then people joined up in order to have the kind of > > conversation John and xorxes are having. > > I think that is untrue. I personally know 3 people who, after an > initial expression of interest in the language, cited these > exchanges - I can't call them discussions - as their reason for > giving up. > > It was the only reason ever given. I've had similar experiences. > > It is leaving the stage where the project is to develop the > > language, and entering the stage where the project is to spread > > the language and accumulate a huge corpus of texts. > > And I am extemely pleased to see it doing so. However, whence > cometh the texts aimed at beginners, with easy grammar and easy > vocabulary? Your podcasts are superb, but horror novels using > even mildly complex grammar and large vocabularies are not > effective texts for beginners. People write what they want to write. If you want to see texts for beginners, you should start writing them. However, note that there really is a *large* amount of stuff out there: http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Texts+In+Lojban&bl > And I *am* interested in the semantics of {lo}, and I would love > to see a simple and elegant explanation thereof. Is there something wrong with http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=How%20to%20use%20xorlo ? -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!" Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.