X-Digest-Num: 69
Message-ID: <44114.69.360.959273824@eGroups.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 03:25:17 -0300
From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@intermedia.com.ar>
Subject: Re: Dao De Jing [was Re: Promoting Lojban]
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 360
Content-Length: 1454
Lines: 37

la lindjy,min cusku di'e

>Since Lojban is firstly defined to
>test the Sapir-Wholf theory, let's assume it be true first. Since Lojban is
>based in predicate logic, it derives all limitation and implicities of it;
>thus Lojbanists' way of thinking are limited by the logic.

I disagree with that. There is nothing in Lojban that limits you to
logical thinking. Just because something is called a logical language
doesn't mean that it is a logical language. I don't think Lojban is more
nor less logical than English, Chinese, or any other language, unless
by "logical" we mean something like regular, with a rational spelling,
or things like that, that don't really have to do with logic. Languages
in themselves are not logical or illogical. Only what you say in the
language can be called logical or illogical, and in Lojban you can
make illogical statements with equal ease as in any other language,
and they're perfectly grammatical.

Taking Robin's example, in Lojban you can say:

            ro relselse'u bakni cu citka lo srasu
            Every two-headed cow eats grass.

and there is absolutely nothing in the language that tells you that the
statement is true, or false, or true-and-false-and-meaningless. You
can choose by yourself what truth value, if any, you want to give it.
So I don't understand why people say that Lojban can in any way
limit Lojbanist's way of thinking or expressing themselves.

co'o mi'e xorxes