From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:59:21 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 29159 invoked from network); 8 Nov 1996 19:46:45 -0000 Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 8 Nov 1996 19:46:45 -0000 Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <2.6938F32B@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 20:46:42 +0100 Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 14:43:00 -0500 Reply-To: John Cowan Sender: Lojban list From: John Cowan Organization: Lojban Peripheral Subject: Re: CONLANG: Simplicity X-To: Conlang List , Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1609 Lines: 41 Message-ID: Markku Kuoppassa scripsit (on Conlang): > Robin Gaskell cited Claudio Gnoli: > > CG> I am wondering about redundancy from time to time. > CG> While I am planning a logical conlang, I tend to remove anything > CG> seems "meaningless" or "useless", but I'm afraid in this way I miss > CG> some important function which is hidden in natlangs, such as > CG> redundancy. > > IMHO, many of the constructors of logical languages miss the point when it > comes to the definition of "logic". If it is their aim to build a language that > shall be parseable by a computer, eliminating redundancy certainly *is* > desireable. I don't see any connection between machine-parsability and lack of redundancy (or the desirability thereof). Lojban is machine-parsable, but has redundancy in several places. There is phonological redundancy: we exploit only fairly common sounds, having only 24 phonemes. There is morphological redundancy: compound words can often have several forms, semantically identical, but some shorter (less redundant), some longer (more redundant). There is syntactic redundancy: more than one way to say sentences. > But some seem to believe that such languages could be spoken by > human beings. Human beings have spoken Lojban, although no human beings have *acquired* Lojban as native speakers. > That would include the proposal that a human brain works in the > same way as a computer. Not at all. I hold no such views, nor AFAIK does anyone at Lojban Central. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban