Return-Path: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@vms.dc.LSOFT.COM Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id SAA17546 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 1995 18:38:41 +0200 Message-Id: <199512111638.SAA17546@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi> Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F93F8BBE ; Mon, 11 Dec 1995 17:38:40 +0100 Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 11:37:20 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: lojban dialectology X-To: ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 869 Lines: 18 >We ought to keep track of the various good ideas, mostly thought up >by Jorge, for improving Lojban, that get rejected by Lojban Central >because of the need to keep promises about getting a version of the >language finished asap. Once those promises are kept, we can then >evolve a dialect incorporating all these improvements. Or in fact we >could start already, trying out these dialectal variants in usage. > >"Better lojban be better than it be finished" - let that be a motto. >Or "Lojban finished is Lojban finished". Instead, why not speak the language as defined and let it evolve NATURALLY rather than by intent? THAT os why I want Lojban "finished" - because it is NOT the purpose of the language design effort to render itself self-sutaining. When people introduce new proposals by intention, that is NOT The same thing as happens in natlangs. lojbab