From lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRDhk7bfBBoE4ZSBTQ@googlegroups.com Fri May 14 10:35:50 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f144.google.com ([209.85.210.144]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OCynY-0004ce-AP; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:49 -0700 Received: by yxe8 with SMTP id 8sf1859404yxe.25 for ; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:37 -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-spf:received:message-id:x-ymail-osg:received :x-mailer:references:date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=cx3FeWH+QM8sSU7u9dpiHmdnjKCYkPiNpONieZFZTWg=; b=sT93+84qbnO98dRolzXdxfvtTI0UmkpxKhkOT+rSucT3r2En4PSNBls1BWnbZChE50 /4zPkyXe5NMOQ6LZJpfuhMQMP4tCtIammwfex79boi0U7QYgU4JEnjp5tcDsEHZmvLko /1p0DNd7grLZj+Er9FpHITIc4x0VFscZVBqic= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references :date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=TTsDsbxm2mHUaQnhNMfgyA5Csjso0xS4kLO1z0mRFzUtnCr1fch3MMq+zILBZeaSA4 n7OgdJt6qXdGxKNJQEVifMV/+v4Sq4S8mc0Lh8/ZRemD6WzYMPkgZP+0dAVJlz+YWhLT FcH6TCv4UfhWLgLnyQfADwGDFiak4awWU78+0= Received: by 10.150.162.1 with SMTP id k1mr193182ybe.78.1273858529676; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:29 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.150.242.38 with SMTP id p38ls2003101ybh.6.p; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.183.7 with SMTP id g7mr733965ybf.17.1273858523956; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.183.7 with SMTP id g7mr733961ybf.17.1273858523512; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.199.122]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id z7si3048416ybc.2.2010.05.14.10.35.22; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.122 as permitted sender) client-ip=68.142.199.122; Received: (qmail 45566 invoked by uid 60001); 14 May 2010 17:35:22 -0000 Message-ID: <958654.44739.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: O9FiZyYVM1l1XeBFFQmKz7Fqpe3n6pZo69aAwPY43KXZfHx Z68OokqsNgWE7PJL3pgAHFyiso7XmhsT.AA52BlyX36DXbzTfFsMgLzaMCOA ee.Rj6ilydlZnisShNlsnw.JtrBPYGZPXq8AH0QCmX6wNRelWZAcPR3C8Bve lYPfBV56t7_ARbRXYNGd0jBBpeSMm1a5mUCgRbyOJxnodnjXpNp1FMAzT4Rf YoTai_COBU53kalCEDfyZjNJLCMiYaxnxbRXW2v.x4uTL9Q7VznRWPelvrXe vnhdAPn2hnvF75ZJsAfLy7c.u0uvF5MsVrBmijrUcpninHVyVEuM0gg8vJ9. 4PPIiMJWhiHY44OdcW8hISZcpApCEeDTuUR6w Received: from [71.14.73.129] by web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:21 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/374.4 YahooMailWebService/0.8.103.269680 References: <4BE21192.5090804@lojban.org> <4BE2396F.2000003@lojban.org> <4BE2C6E3.50109@gmail.com> <4BE2CD7B.3010306@lojban.org> Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 10:35:21 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: [lojban] Comparison to Ilaksh? To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: <4BE2CD7B.3010306@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.122 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.com X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com 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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I used to be of Lojbab's mind on this, but a few years with the Language Cr= eation Society has loosened me up quite a bit. The requirement, that a lan= guage needs to be human-usable in real time, now seems to me to be too limi= ted in several ways -- besides being hard to test. I know a handful of pe= ople who claim (and I am not going to get into trying to test them) to have= used Ithkuil for communication, although I don't know how real-time it was= (but then, I don't know many people who do Lojban in real time either -- m= ore than formerly, to be sure). And, of course, I see no reason to deny la= nguage to critters other than humans, provided certain formal constraints a= re met (so, maybe no terrestrial cases, but ets are open), even if they ar= e not languages a human could use (colored patches on the skin, say, or ten= tacle semaphore, to cite two cases from the last LCC). Even the structural= requirements may go by, at least insofar as our knowledge goes. I was willing to believe that Klingon was a language even before Okrand came= along and gave it structure and I do the same for Prawn even though there = does not seem to be any information about it. Maybe that is because I see = humanoids using it obviously effectively for communication with others, inc= luding humans. In this way, many "languages" from books and movies get in = even though their structures are virtually unknown, some being represented = by only a couple of (unexplained) expressions or even just by names (Cthulh= -- that's from memory and seems too simple, Tlo"n, whatever it was that Gu= lliver got called in Liliputian). But in this they are not that different = from some natural languages, e.g., Etruscan, which we are still willing to = call languages. We can go further with this sort of analogy, to cases of "= languages" where all we have are unreadable texts (Phaistos disk, frinstanc= e), so why not allow things like the "Chinese book" that contains many character-like items but no real characters -- and has no translation= . That is, the analogies with our knowledge of actual languages allows us = to let into the fold of conlangs a large number of items that are deficient= or deviant in various ways. And given that, it seems harsh to exclude a "= language" with a fully specified grammar, phonology, and semantics, just be= cause we can't imagine anyone using it in real time. Most artlangs are at = least capable of being put into some sort of context where they make perfec= t sense as languages and that may be enough to count, even if that context = is not (even cannot be) realized. Them damned thousand flowers again. ----- Original Message ---- From: Robert LeChevalier To: lojban@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, May 6, 2010 9:08:59 AM Subject: Re: [lojban] Comparison to Ilaksh? And Rosta wrote: > * Lojban aimed to be human-speakable and to acquire a speech community. I= thkuil did not aim to be usable by humans in real-time. Ilaksh is less phon= etically daunting than Ithkuil, but still does not aim to be usable by huma= ns in real-time. I guess this is something I'll never understand. To me, if it isn't usable= as a language, then it isn't a language. It might be a language-related a= rt project, as many artlangs seem to be, but I won't pretend to understand = or appreciate art for its own sake. To each, their own. lojbab -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den. =20 --=20 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@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.