From 38fm9SwYKBvQhkfXWXhkfXWj.knchkfXWjckkchacnkqlo.Yki@groups.bounces.google.com Thu Apr 08 08:54:59 2010 Received: from mail-qy0-f166.google.com ([209.85.221.166]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <38fm9SwYKBvQhkfXWXhkfXWj.knchkfXWjckkchacnkqlo.Yki@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1Nzu4E-0007vC-OB for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:54:58 -0700 Received: by qyk38 with SMTP id 38sf1152769qyk.1 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:54:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received:received-spf:received:received:x-vr-score :x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score:message-id:date:from:user-agent :x-accept-language:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=5VXn0twjJZeZ3MF/lQMGqej/bNbtQISo6G9brnwuvjA=; b=tZzAtVaenG8LKWcdmO3i6euhNxi9T+BSPi0MSTOKoEBlWdHWipbIU7AhUdeQFg2cuW JQbMklw0zCA+NonmSkyRfpUql4KBmahFk3zXIPTtOxKrAE1ee1h7UTPWp/XbZ3bPxtVA QmBcdwCrS3qMY0tR1/ZQiCFU/eA7JvtFWNiHI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-vr-score:x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score :message-id:date:from:user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=h8d8TUKCPAAgqiBb2Exdb3GaO1iHRxqPQqQP1LgKAdhdw7NFQt/X2hN4XxpeJPBPzN ZQVf7teiv/uHKmowJOZcDUvIJfuwYSUi08bKpuq+/KQw4RNhJps4gdI99pPRzmy48UkC Ug5psfogHuOVrr8JxLRXdadCnqvP6yIsEvS1E= Received: by 10.229.127.101 with SMTP id f37mr14609qcs.11.1270741489647; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:44:49 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.224.41.66 with SMTP id n2ls2030820qae.3.p; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:44:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.35.29 with SMTP id n29mr33443qad.15.1270741488200; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:44:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.171.67 with SMTP id g3mr69230vcz.27.1270741400181; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:43:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.171.67 with SMTP id g3mr69229vcz.27.1270741400140; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:43:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eastrmmtao101.cox.net (eastrmmtao101.cox.net [68.230.240.7]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 27si488918vws.5.2010.04.08.08.43.19; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:43:19 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.240.7 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.240.7; Received: from eastrmimpo02.cox.net ([68.1.16.120]) by eastrmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP id <20100408154320.JYMM14747.eastrmmtao101.cox.net@eastrmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 11:43:20 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([70.187.225.124]) by eastrmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id 33jK1e00E2hfrC6023jKrr; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:43:19 -0400 X-VR-Score: -130.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=lL4dQe6A0XfTYzqIbzpq/h+TkgPEjAvcHnuEPneVQrQ= c=1 sm=1 a=vaWviJ_AJkYA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=lsg66w07okjF3vGJL2g+Jw==:17 a=d3LKUj5-Hgyu14LaTw4A:9 a=eYgbYfHaX7BqzFQKboMA:7 a=wkiZhusQQbfuar2kVJnlPPeWes8A:4 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=lsg66w07okjF3vGJL2g+Jw==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <4BBDF980.30103@lojban.org> Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:42:56 -0400 From: Bob LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-announcements] Essay on the future of Lojban, with a simple poll for the community. References: <20100405210225.GW6084@digitalkingdom.org> <4BBC3CE4.6080803@lojban.org> <20100407180152.GI11541@digitalkingdom.org> In-Reply-To: <20100407180152.GI11541@digitalkingdom.org> X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 68.230.240.7 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: X-Thread-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/t/c67f210addc06a0c X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/378ccc88b2fabbe Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 04:05:56AM -0400, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > >>Lojban needs to remain stable and resistant to change, especially >>in the near term. When numbers of Lojbanists and formal >>documentation are both strong enough, then "improvements" will >>generally be made by usage, not by fiat, with skilled Lojbanists >>being the only ones having the capability to demonstrate and >>explain their variant usages in-language, and other skilled >>Lojbanists voting-with-their-usage to adopt the variation. > > The problem is this will never, ever happen. Knowing Lojbanists as > I do, what would actually happen is we'd argue about things and then > decide what to adopt explicitely, and *then* go out and use it. > This is very much not anything like real language drift, which is > what you seem to have in mind. Actually I think it is, although most language drift changes take place without the debate. But clearly the replacement of "-man" by "-person" in many English words, and the loss of the traditional use of the word "gay" are examples of language drift that was strongly influenced by debate. Some people have tried to implement gender-neutral third person pronouns, usually with some amount of debate or explanation. Some use them without explanation and somehow are understood anyway. Any attempt to actually make such a pronoun "standard" would however cause enormous acrimonious debate. In your scenario, if the arguments were taking place solely in Lojban, and decision to adopt was informal and applied only to those who agreed to adopt it and they then used it, setting examples for the rest of us to either emulate or ignore, then I cannot imagine anything better. If I ever "adopt" xorlo in my own work, it will almost certainly be because I unconsciously do so based on exemplary usages by others. Depending on what the change was, and who did the adopting, I would imagine that byfy would certify text written with the change either as II.3 (baseline-compliant with minor variants) or III (LLG approved author). Of course, level IV usage needs no approval. lojbab -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.