From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Nov 13 17:46:09 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:46:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GjnMy-00061J-Cf for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:45:48 -0800 Received: from pi.meson.org ([66.134.26.207]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GjnMu-000619-Hq for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:45:48 -0800 Received: (qmail 6971 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2006 01:45:43 -0000 Received: from nagas.meson.org (HELO ?192.168.1.101?) (1000@192.168.1.101) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 14 Nov 2006 01:45:43 -0000 Message-ID: <45591FC7.9010401@kli.org> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 20:45:43 -0500 From: "Mark E. Shoulson" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: "la" rule References: <325816428.20061113190842@mail.ru> <20061113171203.GD24729@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <4558B5C3.9020006@kli.org> <87d57rxf3v.fsf@gmail.com> <4558E2A1.9010907@lojban.org> <4558F43D.4070601@kli.org> <45591BFC.7080808@lojban.org> In-Reply-To: <45591BFC.7080808@lojban.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 13138 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: mark@kli.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Bob LeChevalier wrote: > > The la rule isn't required with standard (spaces included) > orthography, and without a speaking community. When we have a skilled > speaking community, we can find out whether la in names in the spoken > language causes problems for humans - after all, humans can parse > English and other human languages successfully, and they aren't > audiovisually isomorphic. Then why are we bothering in the first place? I thought there was a reason we wanted audiovisual isomorphism for Lojban. If that isn't a requirement, then we can drop a lot of other confusing stuff from the grammar too. Or just stick with English. People can parse that too. It's like I said, pick your disaster. Is audio-visual isomorphism an important part of Lojban? Important enough to keep around? Is losing it worth keeping pauseless LA? Apparently it is, to you. If that's the general feeling, fine. But do recognize what it is you're doing. ~mark 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.