From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:59:21 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 23760 invoked from network); 15 Nov 1996 16:00:03 -0000 Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 15 Nov 1996 16:00:02 -0000 Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <6.E732915F@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Fri, 15 Nov 1996 17:00:01 +0100 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 07:58:04 -0800 Reply-To: "Bruce R. Gilson" Sender: Lojban list From: "Bruce R. Gilson" Subject: Re: CONLANG: Re: Vocabulary definition X-To: conlang@diku.dk, cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG, lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1474 Lines: 34 Message-ID: John Cowan wrote: >Claudio Gnoli wrote (on Conlang): >> Which are the most "useful" meanings? I suppose this problem was >> faced when the basic Lojban vocabulary was defined. >It should have been, certainly. The Lojban place structure list, >which contains entries of the form: >klama: x1 goes/comes to x2 from x3 via route x4 using means x5 >has been obsessively reviewed and revised and re-reviewed and >re-revised, but it's a tremendous job: very few people have the >fortitude to process 1350 or so entries, and tend to run out of >steam somewhere in the Fs. >In essence, this is one of those jobs that is not so much >finished as abandoned. There have been various attempts at >rationalizing entries that should be parallel, sometimes successfully, >sometimes not. This is why I felt that the Lojbanis did a bad thing when they decided to declare it "baselined." But Lojbab and I have had arguments on that subject, and my view was definitely not shared by the majority of the Lojban group. And that, basically, is why I dropped the Lojban list. I felt I could not contrib- ute what I wanted to, which was to help develop a language. Bruce R. Gilson email: brg@netcom.com IRC: EZ-as-pi WWW: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3141 (for language stuff: add /langpage.html)