From lojban-out@lojban.org Fri Sep 27 17:00:59 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 28 Sep 2002 00:00:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 70350 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2002 00:00:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Sep 2002 00:00:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Sep 2002 00:00:59 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17v559-0004yl-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:03:39 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17v54c-0004yT-00; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:03:06 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:03:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17v54Z-0004yK-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:03:03 -0700 Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (asdf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g8S073GZ030739; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:07:03 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from fracture@cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com) Received: (from fracture@localhost) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g8S073UB030738; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:07:03 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:07:03 -0500 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Cc: John Cowan Subject: [lojban] Re: interactions between tenses, other tenses, and NA Message-ID: <20020928000703.GB30608@allusion.net> References: <200209272023.QAA29266@mail2.reutershealth.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Y7xTucakfITjPcLV" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 1652 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Jordan DeLong From: Jordan DeLong Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 16142 --Y7xTucakfITjPcLV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 12:42:40AM +0100, And Rosta wrote: > John: > > And Rosta scripsit: > > > To me it seems one of the more naturalistic features of Lojban -- > > > a quirky, exceptional, counterintuitive, unnecessary complication, > > > of the sort natlangs are full of & Lojban is largely free of. > >=20 > > What is alien is that a contradictory negation particle should be other > > than at the beginning of the sentence. > >=20 > > In Loglan, sentence-initial "no" served this function. IIRC, Lojbab > > consciously moved it from the natural sentence-initial position to just > > before the selbri "because it was more naturalistic". IMHO a mistake. >=20 > As is obvious, I agree that the decision was a terrible mistake, but > the idea that "it was more naturalistic" is fairly defensible, > given that (a) some lects of English have it, and (b) quirkiness, > exception-riddenness, counterintuiveness and unnecessary complication > is highly characteristic of natlangs, as evidenced by the way that > more accomplished naturalistic artlangers deliberately try to add > it to their conlangs. There's nothing to prevent you from always saying "naku" or always putting it at the front of the bridi. (That is, unless the fact that you never seem to produce any lojban text could be considered preventative.) --=20 Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u sei la mark. tuen. cusku --Y7xTucakfITjPcLV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline [Attachment content not displayed.] --Y7xTucakfITjPcLV--