From: cbmvax!uunet!ee.mu.OZ.AU!nsn
Message-Id: <9106270045.AA02594@munagin.ee.mu.OZ.AU>
To: lojban-list@snark.thyrsus.com
Cc: nsn@ee.mu.oz.au
Subject: Trademark Languages
Organisation: Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Melbourne
Smiley-Convention: %^)
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 91 10:45:05 +1000
Status: RO

Quoth Mike Urban (how's the s.c.e. FAQ, Mike?)

>Excerpts from mail: 26-Jun-91 "STEVE L RICE"@ALASKA.BI (2034)
>> Here, the people who do have an understanding of language are either
>> shouted down or ignored, for the most part.  Shoulson, Urban, and to
>> a lesser extent jimc (who seems impervious to criticism) aren't given
>> the attention they deserve.  They're your brightest members; don't cast
>> them aside. 

I'm overjoyed that I wasn't mentioned (hehehe), but am wondering how it is
that this list has ignored Mark (Bob Chassell springs to mind more readily
as someone who posts tomes and isn't acknowledged; I hereby acknowledge him:
Bob, you and I should get together and draft the dictionary sometime). A
lack of followups does not mean contempt or ignoring, and I've enjoyed what
Mark's had to say a lot, remedial tanru or no remedial tanru%^). If la lojbab.
seems somewhat tightlipped (particularly wrt jimc), it is becuase he is
pummelling down the highway towards a textbook; and, with some pangs about
the fact that a few of my fave eensy-weensy baseline changes might have to
wait for discussion a year, this is fair. But I for one lojbani do not ignore
jimc; I'm irritated by his version of binxo, but he has given me some helpful
insights, and I urge him to keep burbling. mi nelci loi diklujvo

.i ro mipeza cu gleki lanzu .ia?pei zo'o
( all me/we associated with this medium-large space are happy-family agree-
do-ya? hehe)

>It might also be observed that Ido, whose speakers
>considered it to be the logical successor to, and best revision of,
>Esperanto, did not go around referring to their language as `Esperanto',
>or `an Esperanto', nor did they start referring to Esperanto as `Academy
>Esperanto' or any such silliness -- this in spite of the fact that
>Esperanto was in the public domain and not a Trademark.  To do so would
>have been both rude and confusing.

Um... sorry, Mike, but go back to Vol.2 of Leteroj de Zamenhof. Couturat
did propose to Uncle Lutek that Ido be called Simpligita Esperanto, and
Uncle Lutek did refuse. If anyone wants to exhume the sorry details, I can
give them a translation of the relevant bits of the correspondence.

I find the schism regrettable, but ultimately uninteresting. Sorry about that.
In any case, the soap opera of the Espo schism is far more interesting - 
recall Javal's 250000 Franc bribe offer to Zamenhof to remove the circumflexes,
Mike?

Enough unpleasantries. Starting next week, I'll be teaching you all place
structures (hodeho). cradi first up, then draci, then zbasu. Whippee!