From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Fri Sep 17 06:28:12 1993 Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 17 Sep 1993 10:30:44 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 17 Sep 1993 10:30:40 -0400 Message-Id: <199309171430.AA03963@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5852; Fri, 17 Sep 93 10:28:56 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1624; Fri, 17 Sep 93 10:31:31 EDT Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1993 10:28:12 -0400 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: John Hodges introductory piece posted a couple weeks ago. X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: I've now seen three messages in response to this posting which indicate total confusion as to what it was and why I posted it. Most of the comments have been in regard to the imperfections in the Lojbanizing of names. 1. The text was prepared about 2 1/2 years ago by John Hodges without any feedback from the community. He has been largely self-taught, and therefore recognizes and admits that there would be many errors in his draft. In the case of names, though, he can point fingers back to the earlier list of names in the Synopsis (which dates to 1987 in this matter), whihc in turn dates back to Chuck Barton's draft Loglan primer from the early 1980's. In other words - we know that the thing has errorrs in it. 2. The immediate reason for posting was that Nick had suggested that it would be useful/interesting to accumulate "interesting" sentences or phrases in Lojban. I mentioned that Hodges had done this intro text with the specific purpose of including interesting sentences to make the thing less dry than the Overview and the Duagrammed Summary (which was then at a much more rudimentary stage than it is now, but in any case has examples intended to be clear rather than intersting). 3. I thus would like/hope that anyone working on such an accumulation of sentences/phrases would make use of John's work as appropriate. 4. It might or might not be useful/appropriate or whatever for someone to take the draft and rewrite it without the errors and updated to the current language, and otherwise better organized. This is a much more signifi- cant undertaking than picking out errors in the text (since there is no editor, de jour or otherwise, working on it, incidental notes of errors is probably not too helpful - the thing needs too much work to worry about how individual names are Lojbanized. lojbab