From lojban+bncCKv97aq_GRDMuaDpBBoEbUaKRg@googlegroups.com Sat Jan 08 00:14:19 2011 Received: from mail-fx0-f61.google.com ([209.85.161.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PbTwD-00030A-UE; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:14:19 -0800 Received: by fxm10 with SMTP id 10sf7460583fxm.16 for ; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:14:07 -0800 (PST) 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:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=nMkpOGOmm5xHHn+i4fr2pj5m94YGmysUKCaS6ukZM0k=; b=vogk8k641WBkSHwEht3QODEMG6YV3sZIlH2BZ/uS//wqmO4ClDcYSfDOT7QhDUx1Ly NbpQyHFlVWJ4wtNQmRKfnW8MI6ufD78eFMIMGS76BwrphyhRwhZLp2dZmYYLO8J/ZpG9 71vLpKefD370FLY7qKGw/EV5X7WkodNfYUGaM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=YW5E5+JE0CXm7XElkH92eHy4rK/Uoi/ek1ZT/8CwXv/dMPrK9bCu7FwI3pByifP3wF SdLu/sVF1Fde4tJEScikmKw1Gc8MOj7YB4YXg2qsl2vjXP2LAagS1Chu7MJj3hjB6lq7 Dpb3YEpXqcQ12blRPTvqv53VJoGPY8pYpfkm0= Received: by 10.223.74.11 with SMTP id s11mr1935129faj.39.1294474444160; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:14:04 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.223.160.8 with SMTP id l8ls5040467fax.2.p; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:14:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.79.11 with SMTP id n11mr1695625fak.3.1294474443087; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:14:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.79.11 with SMTP id n11mr1695624fak.3.1294474443056; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:14:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-bw0-f52.google.com (mail-bw0-f52.google.com [209.85.214.52]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 9si2261761fax.13.2011.01.08.00.14.01; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:14:02 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lamelnyk@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.52; Received: by bwz4 with SMTP id 4so17968424bwz.39 for ; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:14:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.33.74 with SMTP id g10mr6881447bkd.131.1294474441789; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:14:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.66.77 with HTTP; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 00:14:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <63371.11455.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <9114501.161.1294150198377.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqhy19> <7c0687a1-deba-495a-9760-95d1d0649423@t8g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <20110105165231.GK17534@digitalkingdom.org> <4D25CFD8.6010408@lojban.org> <63371.11455.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 10:14:01 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Lojban is *NOT* broken! Stop saying that! (was Re: [lojban] Re: Vote for the Future Global Language) From: Oleksii Melnyk To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lamelnyk@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lamelnyk@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lamelnyk@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.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: multipart/alternative; boundary=00032555f7064613030499515194 --00032555f7064613030499515194 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 2011/1/8 John E Clifford > I suppose that what is meant is the right words, not just the number. The > autogenerated ones would not be intelligible Lojban, even if they were > well-formed. > The first allocation method still works -- as the vocabulary is being constantly filled with the meanings, that appears in the lojbanist's sight. Yes, no one will know all the words - just like in most of natlangs. > The claim is basically, that we aren't "finished" because we haven't talked > enough about enough things, certainly that there are things talked about in > other languages which have never been mentioned in Lojban and yet are in the > realm of Lojbanists' experiences (this to keep Piranha finished even though > no one has talked about nuclear physics -- or plain physics -- in it). > To make that a good criteria we need to define the "standard native speaker", and it should be slightly educated 10 years old child - after that they becomes too different. Does lojban's vocabulary covers such a needs? -- mu'o mi'e lex -- 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. --00032555f7064613030499515194 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2011/1/8 John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>=
I suppose that what is meant is the right words, not just= the number.=A0 The autogenerated ones would not be intelligible Lojban, ev= en if they were well-formed.=A0

The first allocation method still works -= - as the vocabulary is being constantly filled with the meanings, that appe= ars in the lojbanist's sight. Yes, no one will know all the words - jus= t like in most of natlangs.

=A0
The claim is basically, that we aren't "finished" becaus= e we haven't talked enough about enough things, certainly that there ar= e things talked about in other languages which have never been mentioned in= Lojban and yet are in the realm of Lojbanists' experiences (this to ke= ep Piranha finished even though no one has talked about nuclear physics -- = or plain physics -- in it).

To make that a good criteria we ne= ed to define the "standard native speaker", and it should be slig= htly educated 10 years old child - after that they becomes too different. D= oes lojban's vocabulary covers such a needs?

--
mu'o mi'e lex

--
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.
--00032555f7064613030499515194--