From lojban+bncCNTPpI2KGxD90pPpBBoEngtXXA@googlegroups.com Wed Jan 05 13:58:36 2011 Received: from mail-qw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.216.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PabNG-0006Nq-B2; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:58:36 -0800 Received: by qwd6 with SMTP id 6sf53322737qwd.16 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:58:24 -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:x-authority-analysis:x-cloudmark-score :x-originating-ip:received:received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:message-id: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:content-disposition; bh=ifTtslbSvI5WQoMYaO9Zqq6HpSAh7FL55tJpKb1s5kY=; b=z3to8YMKbsoZTv7HpC2cft/VwiJB1trwBfmfnD2ZumAS+shSwMvyZdo6BzTvaqfaYu SrvXm51oer4riJjNFNnS+L0FRyitKZX/puIBsDulZz4Rz0LknTDY3IsWfArDRI7GDlxY E4gnDgb1dcu3tZLi2O1wVkNO6krNVJd5WA8DY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-authority-analysis:x-cloudmark-score :x-originating-ip:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references :in-reply-to:mime-version:message-id: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:content-disposition; b=0rE6HEiDIdKlQEcaN3DgBu5JabRXF0oKzuzXKVmwdIZwmJe5RN3x+U2U2d5GOUkm93 IB+7C7VbZhO6sUL9zgYBYaEXaPpoPRes12J2mIgmovEEQDjaeMjGrw3SGQeOnopqhhIB CRIbw8/RetAPokF2Ycq5ZF659exUPm4tgB33w= Received: by 10.229.20.19 with SMTP id d19mr3271067qcb.20.1294264701198; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:58:21 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.197.8 with SMTP id ei8ls3945881qcb.1.p; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:58:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.81.14 with SMTP id v14mr172886qck.1.1294264700535; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:58:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.81.14 with SMTP id v14mr172885qck.1.1294264700473; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:58:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com (cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com [75.180.132.123]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id l11si4371458qcg.0.2011.01.05.13.58.20; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:58:20 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 75.180.132.123 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of phma@phma.optus.nu) client-ip=75.180.132.123; X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=3jtQBdTzPyV+fq4oCU/u8ZPrJJGN11HvhaDVxyWhycI= c=1 sm=0 a=byV5Iu3YgjcA:10 a=wPDyFdB5xvgA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=9o99xeNKNPYSmM5t9x5+TQ==:17 a=LPLtg1GvFONO_ZqzEusA:9 a=ghGGU7oh52byXwaRZlDgddnyBAMA:4 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=9o99xeNKNPYSmM5t9x5+TQ==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 75.176.118.168 Received: from [75.176.118.168] ([75.176.118.168:59028] helo=chausie) by cdptpa-oedge02.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP id 6E/46-02631-B79E42D4; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:58:19 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chausie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91B7D243A for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 16:58:18 -0500 (EST) From: Pierre Abbat To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: [lojban] Re: Lojban is *NOT* broken! Stop saying that! Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 16:58:13 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) References: <9114501.161.1294150198377.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqhy19> <20110105165231.GK17534@digitalkingdom.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201101051658.16043.phma@phma.optus.nu> X-Original-Sender: phma@phma.optus.nu X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 75.180.132.123 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of phma@phma.optus.nu) smtp.mail=phma@phma.optus.nu 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-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 05 January 2011 16:34:21 Ivo Doko wrote: > Also, I've realised I made a typo: I meant to say that Esperanto is "far > from being completely regular and logical > ", not that it's "far from being completely *ir*regular and logical", sorry > if that confused anybody. > > As for the title/subject, I never said that lojban is *broken*, pardon me, > I only said that it isn't finished, which is not something I made up - I > constantly read people both newbies and oldies ranting on about how there's > so much work yet to be done on lojban and how every now and then someone > will take upon him-/herself to finish whatever is left unfinished and it > will look like he/she will accomplish it but then he/she gives up and yadda > yadda. To me that seems like lojban is, to put it as simple as possible, > not finished. Esperanto, on the other hand, is. Were you trying to say that > Esperanto isn't finished either? It may not be as "fully defined" as lojban > is, but that doesn't really say much. Esperanto never aimed to be what > lojban aims to be - a completely logical and fully unambiguously defined > language. Instead, Esperanto aimed to be a language which is as unambiguous > and as regular as it can be while still operating like a naturally-evolved > language as much as possible. In order for a language to be like that, it > doesn't have to be as fully defined as lojban does in order to be finished, > which is the reason why Esperanto is a finished language while lojban is > not. Even though lojban is better defined than Esperanto, it's not as fully > defined as it should be in order for it to be finished, because the current > level of its well-definiteness is not good enough for what lojban aims to > be. Esperanto has at least one word which proves that its words cannot be unambiguously parsed: "avaro" is derived from the same root as "avarice", but collides with "avaro", from "avo" (grandfather) and the suffix "ar". Also the relation among the noun "brodo", the adjective "broda", and the verb "brodi" depends on which was formed first, unlike the corresponding rule in Lojban, which is that "le" or "lo" always takes something that fits or is described as fitting in x1 of the selbri. The main thing that Lojban lacks for being used as a global language is not the precise definition of every corner case. It's vocabulary. And because its morphology is defined so as to prevent collisions like "avaro", it takes longer to invent vocabulary in Lojban. You can't take some Latinate term that's commonly used in many languages, some of them unrelated to Latin, and expect to make a brivla out of it just by changing "-us" to "-o". You have to consider whether a lujvo would capture the meaning better, whether the second consonant is in a cluster, and whether the same word could mean something totally different (such as "malpigi" which could be either an acerola fruit or an insect's kidney). Pierre -- I believe in Yellow when I'm in Sweden and in Black when I'm in Wales. -- 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.