From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Sep 11 09:41:56 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 11 Sep 2009 09:41:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Mm9C8-0006ZS-4n for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 09:41:56 -0700 Received: from eastrmmtao103.cox.net ([68.230.240.9]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Mm9C2-0006YP-O3 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 09:41:55 -0700 Received: from eastrmimpo03.cox.net ([68.1.16.126]) by eastrmmtao103.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP id <20090911164144.LSTK913.eastrmmtao103.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net> for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:41:44 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([70.187.235.94]) by eastrmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp id fUhj1c00K22sj6m02UhjgE; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:41:43 -0400 X-VR-Score: -100.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=TMsMKZZnsQbXG28mmK8A:9 a=f_-3wjC3w7PoskgHh_AA:7 a=WmO0d6cgySQFrb31op9-9R1vmTQA:4 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <4AAA7DC4.40801@lojban.org> Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:41:40 -0400 From: Bob LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: xorlo References: <9ada8ecd0909051425t78a046f3kddef2869e5c8e7a2@mail.gmail.com> <9ada8ecd0909080221h297baa5eqb5eba2ad6ac1d5d5@mail.gmail.com> <200909080827.14128.phma@phma.optus.nu> <9ada8ecd0909081238j2649ee89g28c6b34c72d82b18@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560909081321x34f3faa1u40106c6ed49b5972@mail.gmail.com> <9ada8ecd0909081431m6758386dgf241e2b27e99b5d7@mail.gmail.com> <9ada8ecd0909081441y42709788laa0acf4937dc03ba@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9ada8ecd0909081441y42709788laa0acf4937dc03ba@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-archive-position: 16158 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Squark Rabinovich wrote: > What's up with the /gadri/ proposal administratively speaking? From the 2007 annual meeting minutes > 1) The following procedures are added to the extant BPFK procedures: > > "Any proposal which at least half of the BPFK membership has > voted on in a tentative vote with none voting against, may be > submitted by the BPFKJ to the general membership as a possible > piece of the zasni gafyfantymanri ("interim baseline", herein > after referred to as the ZG). Such a proposal requires a > two-thirds majority of those voting to vote in favor of it at > the general membership meeting in order to pass. > > Voting something into the ZG has the following effects: > > 1. The proposal will be considered correct Lojban until such a > time the complete new baseline is established and approved by > the membership. Usage according to the CLL standard will not be > considered incorrect, but usage according to the ZG will be > preferred. > > 2. The BPFK will recognize that such a vote indicates a desire > by the membership for the proposal in question to be included, > in modified form if necessary, when the new baseline is > finished. Such a desire will not be considered binding in any > way. > > 3. The membership is encouraged to use the ZG standard in all > pedagogical contexts, and in all Lojban conversation. > > The ZG will last only until the entire new baseline is written > by the BPFK and approved by the membership." > > In addition, xorlo was added to the zasni gafyfantymanri In other words, more or less, it is "preferred" and quasi-official, but not final. I suspect that in software terms, it is like being part of a beta version. > As far as > I understand, it goes back at least to 2004. Why haven't it been > introduced into the grammar reference yet? Because it is likely that nothing will be introduced into the grammar reference (i.e there will be no "final" baseline) until ALL of the pieces are done. This makes sense in that until all the pieces are done, there could be unknown interactions whose resolution is complicated by finalizing only part of the grammar. Unfortunately, most of the people who really care about finalizing the entire language are burnt out or in a bad stage of life to contribute to the process. >Is it still under evaluation, > and if so, when will it be finally accepted into the language? For one sense of "accepted into the language" it already is. In another sense, when the byfy finally finishes the entire baseline (and the reference grammar is then revised to reflect that baseline). And unfortunately, for some of us oldtimers who don't really understand xorlo, "accepted" is a word that may never really apply. xorxes has (at times at least) said that in actually usage it will seldom make any difference - that the differences mostly lie in how it is explained or taught in logical terms. So I will probably continue to use the language as I know it until/unless someone tells me I am wrong, but I've stopped trying to be one who attempts to explain the language to others beyond the rudimentary level. lojbab 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.