Re: [lojban] Re: "la" in names

[Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>]

Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
> Bob LeChevalier wrote:
>
> > Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >
> > No.  All I have admitted is that certain kinds of ad hoc word 
> > formation  in the process of translation are prone to error.  Word 
> > making in translation is a major part of the language now.  In the 
> > long run, it will be very minor.  Ad-hoc word making is entirely 
> > orthogonal to speaking the language correctly.
>
> Experience would seem to indicate that this is not so.  People use a LOT 
> of ad-hoc names in ad-hoc conversations on IRC and in emails here.

And 99% of us are still thinking in English or our native language, and 
translating when we do so.  And because of where we are coming from, we 
tend to want to Lojbanize everything.

Mature languages (with skilled speakers) do not need extensive 
ad-hockery.  Borrowings are highly marked when first used, and only get 
absorbed into the lexicon slowly over time.  Lojban has rules for 
allowing this process in a manner that does not violate the language 
principles, but when people push the process along, the deliberation 
that would hammer out rough edges (and rule violations) doesn't take 
place.  So people make mistakes.

Since conversational usage often includes mistakes, I don't place a lot 
of import on whether some feature causes mistakes, especially when the 
alternative approach of mandatory pauses is likely to be equally 
violated by Lojban speakers.

I also don't put much import on the failure of proofreaders to catch the 
errors.  I know how many errors made it into CLL despite a MUCH more 
careful and extensive review, over a much longer period.  We haven't had 
skilled Lojban-speaking editors proofing our works, and everyday 
speakers, no matter how skilled, often miss errors when those errors do 
not impede their understanding.

lojbab