Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 23:42:48 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199710240442.XAA04809@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: HACKER G N Sender: Lojban list From: HACKER G N Subject: Re: Linguistics journals X-To: Lojban List To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: <01bce01d$6cf68560$02180880@rsrodger> X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 690 Lines: 17 On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, Rob Rodgers wrote: > >Don't you think linguists/logicians already HAVE such notational schemes > >in place, which are accepted generally within their own communities? Why > >would they want to learn a WHOLE NEW LANGUAGE just so they can re-invent > >the wheel? :) > > > Gee, the question I was going to ask was why anyone would learn a language > that sort of does the job instead of using existing notation that actually > does it? Hear, hear. That's the way I feel about Lojban with respect not only to linguistic and logical notation, but also machine translation. Lojban at best only SORT OF does the job that existing systems already do. Geoff