RE: [lojban] Re: Why linguists might be interested in Lojban (was:RE: Re: a new kind of fundamentalism

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

Xod:
> On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Robin Turner wrote:
> 
> > I imagine cognitive linguists would also find it interesting from the
> > point of metaphor. Lojban combines the explicit metaphor-making of
> > lujvo (which are not metaphorical in the common sense of the word, but
> > are in the cogling sense) with an attempt to suppress unmarked metaphor
> > (which to a mainstream cognitive linguist would be quixotic but
> > interesting).
> 
> 
> Can you explain more about what Lojban is doing that seems quixotic to
> linguists? Thanks!

A central tenet of Cognitive Linguistics is that metaphor is fundamental
to language -- that everything is metaphor. The classic introduction to
this is the very accessible book _Metaphors we live by_, by George
Lakoff and Mark Johnson, though in the last two decades these ideas
have been greatly extended and refined. Robin is a fully paid up
card carrying Cognitive Linguist.

--And.