From - Mon Feb 26 10:34:46 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id LAA23247 for ; Sat, 24 Feb 1996 11:08:53 -0500 Message-Id: <199602241608.LAA23247@locke.ccil.org> Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.0a) with SMTP id 2398C580 ; Sat, 24 Feb 1996 10:30:38 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 14:58:58 -0700 Reply-To: Chris Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris Bogart Subject: Re: "except" found? X-To: lojban@cuvmb.bitnet To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1419 >And: >>It's very clever, but don't you share my discomfort at using discursives >>in this way? >I agree, but the same happens with "except" in English. Then let's try extra hard not to be malglico! >>Why do you have to press UI into use >>for things that really ought to be handled by the logical bit of the >>bangu? -- feo. > >Well, because I want to be able to use the language spontaneously at >some point. To figure out the underlying logic of some complexes like >"except" takes some thinking, and the same to process it from the >receiving end. Higher level shortcuts like "except" are useful, I think. But this is an interesting S-W test. You say it takes some thinking at both ends. It takes thinking at both ends to produce any Lojban at all, since none of us are super fluent yet. Is it possible that thinking through the underlying logic on the receiving and sending ends, is only a necessity because we haven't been raised speaking Lojban? Maybe jboverba would have no trouble with it. Perhaps po'o is a "high level shortcut" only in the perception of native speakers of Spanish and English? It might even be confusing and counterintuitive to native speakers of a hypothetical lojban-without-po'o. Just a thought, ____ Chris Bogart \ / http://www.quetzal.com Boulder, CO \/ cbogart@quetzal.com Fuck Censorship!