Message-Id: <199602130528.AAA19758@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Mon, 12 Feb 1996 18:20:27 +0000
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: *old response to Steven B #4
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Status: O
Content-Length: 1224

> Lojban List has a decidedly poor reputation in the conlang/linguistic
> community for incredibly arcane discussions of language change.

If it is true (and is it really?) that it has a poor reputation in
the conlang community then maybe that goes to show that the conlang
community deserves its poor reputation in the linguistic community.
I'm not aware of Lojban having any reputation at all in the linguistic
community.

> And Rosta likes it because it is a list where he can actually learn
> some linguistics, but that isn't our main purpose.  We are ALREADY
> losing people, scaring them off by our arcana. That has GOT to stop,
> and be replaced by people USING the language.

Your ends would be most easily achieved by adopting my suggestion and
splitting the list into a tech/arcane and a general list.

> It is my intent and sincere hope that the debates will die away once
> the books are done and nothing anyone says is really going to affect
> usage. But that latter clause has to be true or it won't die away.

It may happen that usage will be impervious to admonition from
prescriptivists. But I hope not, since inevitably usage will sometimes
tend to drift away from the semantic prescription.

coo, mie and