From cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!LOJBAN Tue Dec 10 16:26:36 1991 Return-Path: Date: Tue Dec 10 16:26:36 1991 Message-Id: <9112101812.AA17790@relay1.UU.NET> Reply-To: And Rosta Sender: Lojban list From: And Rosta Subject: Re: place structure of lujvo To: John Cowan , Eric Raymond , Eric Tiedemann In-Reply-To: (Your message of Fri, 06 Dec 91 15:53:04 PST.) <23776.9112071411@ucl.ac.uk Status: RO Jimc says, rightly that Lojbab applies the following argument to Lojban: > 1. In a steady-state natural language the speaker community by > consensus of usage determines the meaning of each word. The linguists > merely describe. Introducing rigid rules (prescriptive linguistics) > goes against what are seen as the natural ungovernability of the > language process. When I learnt English in my infancy, its grammatical rules had been pretty much already established. If I wanted to speak English I had to follow the established rules. With Lojban, certain features of the grammar are decreed (as is appropriate in an artificial lg), but others are left for the users of Lojban to negotiate among themselves. As nothing has been negotiated yet, one can attempt to negotiate for the version of Lojban one prefers. In this case, Jim - or his grandchildren - could seek through insistent usage to infiltrate dikjvo into Lojban. [My preferred coup is to make [@] the buffer vowel & dispense with /y/ hyphens.] I personally feel that too little is decreed, and too much of Lojban is at present a blank sheet awaiting the legislation of protracted and intensive usage of the language. --- And