From cbmvax!uunet!rpi.edu!ash Fri Apr 12 01:47:46 1991
Return-Path: <cbmvax!uunet!rpi.edu!ash>
Message-Id: <9104120559.AA13313@its.rpi.edu>
To: lojban-list@snark.thyrsus.com
Subject: Re: Elision, or: Nick rides again in jbonai 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 11 Apr 91 18:25:02 +0900."
             <9104110825.12552@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU> 
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 02:02:09 -0400
From: Arthur Hyun <cbmvax!uunet!rpi.edu!ash>
Status: RO

Note, Mr. Nicholas's quotes are out of order.

> [ deletions ]
>my God, have you actually ever written an lojban sentence?! 
> [ deletions ]
>(Yes, I'm rather snappy and irritable. It's just that I'd like to see
>someone criticise lojban from within for a change.
> [ deletions ]

  I have perused the first six lessons supplied to me and I feel totally
unable to hold an intelligent conversation, that is, a conversation well-
suited to my and my partner's (for lack of a better word) intellect.  
After having looked carefully at the syntactic tools I have available to
me, I find that I have a comparable ability to the English speaking 
ability of perhaps a first or second grade child.
  My primary interest in lojban is the study of the structure and
the syntax of it, not in learning to speak to anyone with it.  I am
therefore relatively unconcerned with gaining any more than a very
casual familiarity with the vocabulary, and I feel that such a familiarity
will come as I try to express myself in it.  Furthermore, those things
I would try to express are things that English is ill-suited for.  In
order to press my understanding of the syntax of lojban, and therein
the semantic ramifications, I *must* atempt to use lojban to express
non-English, or, things that I would otherwise find difficulty in 
expressing in English.  If this is not possible, I would find it a 
failing of lojban.  
  Before I can express something that I find English ill-suited for,
I require a lojban tool that English either does not have.  Currently, as
of chapter 6, I have no such tool, therefore I feel unable, or unwilling,
to even attempt to use lojban as a language.
  How can I critisize lojban "from within" if I am unable to use it?
True familiarity can only come from use, not study.

> [ deletions ]
>It's [ the EBNF ] a pleasure to be actually able to check through
>a [ lojban ] structure's validity in half a minute.
>
  BEFORE someone says "why don't you just use the BNF or the yacc?":
  Although I am familiar with BNF, it is impossible to use the grammers as a 
learner's tool, as it contains only syntactic and no semantic information,
unlike the words in lojban itself.  Also why I cannot learn from the yacc.
  In other words, I'd love to critisize lojban from "within" the language,
but I am, frankly, totally unable to.

  Also, regarding Mr. Steele's correction, thanks very much, and I stand
corrected.

						cheers,
						arthur