From lojban+bncCMHEmaCOBhCnroftBBoEXVxhvw@googlegroups.com Sun Apr 10 09:13:47 2011 Received: from mail-fx0-f61.google.com ([209.85.161.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Q8xGe-0005Wf-N1; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:46 -0700 Received: by fxm14 with SMTP id 14sf4582191fxm.16 for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature: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:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=ajXMVrPPfAIk2VSTPq3x+4EYeaHv5x9jA43ggk/vwDo=; b=MrWlQJrojImWoa5Pk/KHISq2m63jmMJQstViPXgpVNifZLeHSTTtL7FzbgdyNS9adj hgCp6ffKLcPrDjLo4rpiGpCauG3HAtnExC87fjHM8aIah1XnK9UkvDg2UtEvSgq7LeDX OcHldIIcdY4C+GIPGhwfTIqGJDGO2h3eSV6pA= 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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=2MXmPwjnTDQv4VnlMvtqax/EA3jh4aCfW9Qcqu5Op6ub6LSP4JAIbN/7pCe3W6oOFn ckn0CTzCftDPuAiciZJHtlSinFNrUaR1qJr9zZwoB6KEF0GeTPD0LQ/FCotySabJOogQ vzCAfZg7uFHkjBwBgIrt8fPG4l70/sw9HHreI= Received: by 10.223.148.5 with SMTP id n5mr843743fav.7.1302452007025; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:27 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.223.25.14 with SMTP id x14ls83244fab.3.p; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.95.146 with SMTP id d18mr537559fan.16.1302452005781; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.95.146 with SMTP id d18mr537558fan.16.1302452005756; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f47.google.com (mail-bw0-f47.google.com [209.85.214.47]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r28si481425fam.4.2011.04.10.09.13.25 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.47; Received: by bwz5 with SMTP id 5so4885294bwz.20 for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.38.88 with SMTP id a24mr3795814bke.130.1302452005302; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.116.147 with HTTP; Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 10:13:25 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Regularization From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0003255546f21cf23504a092bdc1 --0003255546f21cf23504a092bdc1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Ian Johnson wrote: > On IRC we were observing that common usage of {va'o} is not really > consistent with its definition as a BAI associated with {vanbi}. Instead, it > winds up being used like a nonlogical "if", that is one with causation > implied in some way. We then went into some ideas about how one might > correct this to make things regular again--redefine va'o, use another gismu > to tie to va'o, bring in a new cmavo to mean what va'o is supposed to mean, > etc. > > And then I realized that this is "regularization"--taking a regular > language that has evolved with usage slightly, but not a whole lot, and > attempting to take the new, evolved language and make it regular again. Is > there a policy or something on this subject? That is, is it official that > Lojban is free to go as it pleases? > > mu'o mi'e .latros. > Not at this point, no. Lojban is now, and will likely remain for a long time, a proscribed language.Any proposed modification of the language must be approved by the BPFK in order to be part of the language. The xorlo proposal is an excellent example of this. -- mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) -- 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. --0003255546f21cf23504a092bdc1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@g= mail.com> wrote:
On IRC we were observing that common usage of {va'o} is not really cons= istent with its definition as a BAI associated with {vanbi}. Instead, it wi= nds up being used like a nonlogical "if", that is one with causat= ion implied in some way. We then went into some ideas about how one might c= orrect this to make things regular again--redefine va'o, use another gi= smu to tie to va'o, bring in a new cmavo to mean what va'o is suppo= sed to mean, etc.

And then I realized that this is "regularization"--taking a r= egular language that has evolved with usage slightly, but not a whole lot, = and attempting to take the new, evolved language and make it regular again.= Is there a policy or something on this subject? That is, is it official th= at Lojban is free to go as it pleases?

mu'o mi'e .latros.

Not at this point, = no. Lojban is now, and will likely remain for a long time, a proscribed lan= guage.Any proposed modification of the language must be approved by the BPF= K in order to be part of the language. The xorlo proposal is an excellent e= xample of this.


--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

= .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi= patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
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.
--0003255546f21cf23504a092bdc1--