From @uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Sun Jun 11 23:32:00 1995 Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3369 ; Sun, 11 Jun 95 23:31:58 BST Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Sat, 10 Jun 95 02:03:43 GMT Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by punt2.demon.co.uk id aa07854; 10 Jun 95 3:03 +0100 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8177; Fri, 09 Jun 95 22:01:18 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2864; Fri, 9 Jun 1995 22:01:17 -0400 Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 22:04:32 EDT Reply-To: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Subject: Re: Lojban a natural language? X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander Message-ID: <9506100303.aa07854@punt2.demon.co.uk> Status: R And: > The voluble contributors to the list are only a small minority of > the community at large, no? Depends what you mean by the community. If you mean subscribers of Ju'i, then I suppose the list may be a minority. If you mean those who ever use the language, I would bet we are the overwhelming majority. > > > even if you would not consent to be considered a rorci. > > I would consent to being a component of loi rorci > Well, there are some loi rorci be Lojban such that Julius Caesar > or my left sock is a component of them. That's not saying much. Could you elaborate on that? I would think that {ro lu'a loi rorci be la lojban cu rorci la lojban}. Why would you call them {loi rorci} if not? > What you want to say is that you are a member of a rorci *group*, > not a component of a rorci *mass*. What is the difference? Jorge