tecu'u la lojba

[dex@xxxxxxx.xxx.xxx]

> From: Goran Topic <amadan@ibm.net>

> Keeping that in mind, can lojban be used for deducing the
> universals of natural human languages?

Offering a new vantage point for comparison can't be bad. 
There were many things we never knew about Earth until we
looked at the Moon and the planets; and the more we look
the more we learn. 

> Despite the fact that stringing rafsi feels very natural to me,
> would such a deduction be scientifically solid, acceptable?
> To make an acceptable scientific argument, I think it would
> be necessary to show the parallelism between the compounding
> mechanisms in lojban and natural languages. If you can do that,
> though, why need lojban?
> Convince me I'm wrong and I'll be very happy. I find it an 
> interesting subject.

I'm not an expert on Lojban, but I've been accused of thinking. 

:=) 

Are you saying that for things to be similar,
they must therefore be identical?