Return-Path: Message-Id: <9112111721.AA09218@relay1.UU.NET> Date: Wed Dec 11 17:02:38 1991 Reply-To: David Cortesi Sender: Lojban list From: David Cortesi Subject: response to Cortesi on regular lujvo and glossaries (fwd) X-To: Lojban mailing list To: John Cowan , Ken Taylor Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Wed Dec 11 17:02:38 1991 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!cuvma.bitnet!LOJBAN Bob LeChevalier straightens me out on the actual usages of lujvo in conversation -- this is very unfair, pouring the cold water of actual experience on a nice warm theoretical discussion! ;-) I accept Bob's point, that it is simply too early to establish prescriptions for lujvo-formation. I reserve judgement on whether it will ever be desirable, but I can accept that I should have a lot more personal experience with the process of both hearing and speaking before I attempt to pronounce on the difficulty of same. Also, I not only accept, but enthusiastically support, this statement: > 1) Most important: I WANT people to write Lojban text and to post > Lojban text, right or wrong. In the end, I am realizing, this has to be the number one priority at this stage of Lojban's development. Anything that promotes/eases attempts at use, for now, is good. Given usage now, there will in the fullness of time be plenty of opportunity for regularization and correction. Without the usage, it won't matter either way. Dave Cortesi