From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu Sun Dec  4 18:58:40 1994
Message-Id: <199412042358.AA05226@nfs1.digex.net>
Date: Sun Dec 4 18:58:40 1994
From: Goran Topic <topic@math.hr>
Subject:      Subject:      Re: TEXT: pemci
Status: RO

> Goran:
> > > > . Bigger. That
> > >
> > > Maybe "trabra" might have been better.
> >
> > ??? "behaver-big"??? Surely you meant {raibra}? Or am I missing something?
>
> I meant "traji". Maybe not bothering to look up the cmavo list is a
                                                      ^^^^^ <- gismu/rafsi :)
> sign of the true Lojbanist (Nick used to guess & sometimes get them
> wrong, & he's a true Lojbanist if ever there was one).

Yep. I completely agree... I am sorry if my comments sometimes appear
harsh. They are, ke'a, ba'e not intended as such. I have great respect
and admiration for all of you who try to make our (yes, our - I would
love to speak lojban fluently and have somebody to speak to, I like it
even more than my own language, regardless of neccessary clumsiness
and/or size of some constructions) language work. I am here to learn,
not to flame, and if some of my posts look like flames, please know
that they contain no reprimands on you (you ARE a true lojbanist!) or
anybody else, but are probably a result of my incomplete mastery of
English written language. I enjoy debates, and I always end up learning
very much from them. That is all.

> > > > 4. Your use of {linji} is metaphorical - doesn't work for boundary
 (sorry
> > > >    to ruin your rhyme) - {linji} is 1-dimensional, continuous set of
>  points.
> > > Poetic licence. "Linji" would be better "korbu", if you take it as
> > > "beyond the bounds of probability"; or you can take it as "off the end
> > > of the scale of probability". As you say, it's a metaphor, & NB it was
> > > LE linji, not LO linji, so no solecism there, I hope.
> >
> > Right. It is non-veridical, but also (I believe) culturally dependent.
> > (I do not know if there is a culture that does not identify lines with
> > boundaries, but it stands to reason - there are many cultures in the
> > world; and I don't think metaphors of this kind, ie. not directly related
> > ro the semantics of the word as defined by the dictionary, should be
> > present in lojban text, but maybe that's just my old overpuristic me...)
>
> Lo Lojbo strikes me as a very Western, indeed a very glico culture.
> We communicate mainly in English. And, for instance, Lojbab has
> observed that for some reason there are a disproportionate number
> of libertarians among its ranks. Cultural neutrality was surely
> part of the language's ideals, when it was designed, but the outcome
> will depend on who uses it.

I ba'e like the idea of cultural neutrality gi'e believe that jboklu
should be separate kulnu rather than synonym for gliklu, regardless
of its membership. Else, every one of the three reasons for the
lojban's existence that I know is lost:

1) Sapir-Whorf hypothesis experiment depends heavily on kamklunu'i.
2) Computers cope with metaphors much harder than humans, which is one
   of the big pluses for lojban in AI communication
   (one-word-has-exactly-one-meaning principle)
3) Should I even mention that one of lojban's biggest features over
   Esperanto is kamklunu'i?

If we disregard nunklunu'i the only thing we are left with is
l'art-pour-l'artistic indulgement, a useless hobby, if you will.

Secondly, there is at least three people here who are not glico:
xorxes, vei,on and me. The three of us certainly communicate a
lot in English, but definitely not mainly. (Make that the two of
us - I do not know about xorxes, since he does ju'oru'e live in
USA).

> And

co'o mi'e. goran. noi pendo ju'o.ia.ai do

--
Learn languages! The more langs you know, the more incomprehensible you can get
e'udoCILreleiBANgu.izo'ozo'onairoBANguteDJUnobedocubanRI'a.ailekadonaka'eSELjmi