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 (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id AAA13707 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 00:20:04 +0200 Message-Id: <199601142220.AAA13707@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi> Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4C097CD8 ; Sun, 14 Jan 1996 23:20:03 +0100 Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996 20:20:48 -0300 Reply-To: Paulo Barreto Sender: Lojban list From: Paulo Barreto Subject: Re: SNU: ki'e doi skot. X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1763 Lines: 38 la lojbab. di'e cusku >[...] There are several leaders in the >community who automatically vote "no" on any new gismu proposal as a >matter of principle. Considering that many people consider that a standard >of knowing the language consists of mastering the gismu list, it is true >that each addition to the list makes mastering the language harder. That's a very poor standard. I know many (non-English-native) people with a rich English vocabulary but a terrible knowledge of English grammar; the net result of this combination is at most funny. Master vocabulary indicates good memory, not language proficiency. Furthermore, the gi'uste is only a part the vocabulary a person must memorize. What do you think is harder to remember, a single word "xorvo" or the list "{gugdrxrvatska, kulnrxrvatska, bangrxrvatska, ...}"? And words for those concepts must be known (or looked up) anyway when we want to express the associated concepts. I doubt mastering the gi'uste weighs more than 20% in measuring Lojban knowledge. This means that adding, say, 50 new gismu would make the language less than 1% harder, if that much (no, I'm not proposing 50 new gismu, that's a hypothetical number). IMHO freezing the number of gismu means resigning to accompany the evolution of the concepts needed by human expression, therefore killing the language. If youdeny this, try to express "software" in Latin (Hmm, perhaps Nick wants to try :-) Resistance to changes is good if one carefully examines the merits/demerits of those changes. Blindly opposing them seems laziness rather than logic. (Now let me hurry into an antinuclear bunker to survive Lojbab's reaction :-) co'o mi'e paulos. Paulo S.L.M. Barreto -- Software Analyst *** PGP public key available ***