Re: [lojban] Dr. James Cooke Brown

["Robert A. McIvor" <rmcivor@macsrule.com>]

From: "Robert A. McIvor" <rmcivor@macsrule.com>

At 11:53 AM -0600 2/18/00, Steven Belknap wrote:
>From: Steven Belknap <sbelknap@uic.edu>
>textbook. It is important to understand that Loglan was *never*
>baselined.
>
	It was never intended that Loglan be baselined. 	Living
languages
change and grow constantly.

>In my judgement, there is simply not the manpower nor the will to do
>what is necessary to independently get Loglan to baseline. At this
>point, it is still a language "under construction", which tends to
>discourage anyone from learning the language, as it will very likely
>change should a baseline be attempted.

In actual fact, changes to the grammar in recent years are very few and far
between.

> There are a few
>inconsistencies and some areas of incompleteness in the Loglan
>grammer.

I am unaware of inconsistencies in the grammar.  Whether or not it is
complete is a matter of definition.  I imagine there are structures in
other languages that have no counterpart in either Loglan or Lojban.
e.g. the Turkish 'gossip' tense that has been recently discussed.

>There is no complete dictionary of predicates.

There has been for years a computerized dictionary not only of predicates
but of most currently used words.  I cannot say 'all' as writers can add to
the list at any time, and
new versions of the dictionary come out only occasionally.  I believe Loglan is
ahead of Lojban in this regard.

>>There are
>inconsistencies in the place structures of Loglan words, even within
>the last published documentation of the language.

I agree with this criticism, but we try to correct these as effort is
available.

>>  I don't think there exists a full grammer. At least I haven't seen one.

There is a published grammar which is conflict free in YACC, and which
parses all currently well-formed Loglan sentences.  I believe it is published
on the Loglan web site.  Rarely (maybe as much as once a year) someone
produces a sentence that parses or fails to parse as 'da' intended, and
that da feels should.  Such a change is discussed by the 'Academy', and, if
approved, the grammar is altered.  No major changes have occurred for
years, though there have been some additions.

I suppose
>one could simply make a new Loglan which is identical to lojban in
>grammer, but has the Loglan words instead. That would be nearly
>painless for Loglanders and would be fairly straightforward.
>
	Since Loglan is not baselined, I am sure we would accept changes
to the grammar that we could be convinced were desirable for whatever
reason.

>It is certainly important that the two communities treat each other
>with mutual respect during the fusion of the two languages. I like
>the <hoa, xo'a> formalism. If this is done, both communities will
>have a viable means of communicating unambiguously in the same forum.

Agreed.

>Given the greater size and vigor of the lojban communit, I would
>predict that the Loglan lexicon will eventually become an alternate
>historical lexicon, sort of like ancient Greek is to modern Greek.
>

Time will tell.

Sincerely,
Robert A. McIvor
(rmcivor@mac.com)



--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

Want to help promote education? Help kids learn to read? AND earn 
extra income? Join our affiliate program for the successful Hooked
on Phonics product and you will do all three.
<a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/echophonics ">Click Here</a>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com