TLI

[CJ FINE <C.J.Fine@bradford.ac.uk>]

Some rambling comments on relations with TLI. 

As predicted by you and Nick, I am inclined to a more moderate line than
many (perhaps it's because I'm a peace student!)

I guess my position on relearning is that, having learned two versions,
(the second being very much better, when I came to it, than the first
was when I left it), I have no objection personally to junking either
of them in order for something at least as good.

That is to say, I would not drop Lojban to pick up something (eg current
TLI) that lacks much of what I love about it; but I would have no strong
objection, for example, to reverting to TLI vocabulary with more-or-less
Lojban grammar, if that were an option. Loglan is to me a relaxation
(which is why, incidentally, my answer to whether I would be interested
in being a voting member was '.ieru'e' - I enjoy spending time on
playing with it, and would be willing to do a certain amount of
background work, but find I am not much motivated to take it more
seriously) and I happen to find learning words and things rather easy,
so I would not complain too much for myself if I had to relearn them.

Having said that, I am aware that this is likely to be a minority view,
and if (as I expect) the bulk of Lojbanists were to resist such a
possibility, I would happily support them. 

To me, the split, with its enmity and waste of resources, is more
important than almost anything else. I am delighted that there is
dialogue at last (I wonder how JCB is viewing it?) and my concern is
that TLI and LLG work together on amicable terms: that is more important
to me than whether there is one language or two. (I can even see some
advantages in having two related but different languages, for many of
the purposes of the project). Least important of all is how the
organisations merge or don't.  [I guess this may be an unwelcome point
of view to Bob, as it might be seen to be making light of the
organisational work he and the others have been putting in over the
years: I do not mean it that way, and acknowledge all you have done to
keep LLG going, particularly in the light of the legal attacks.]

I do find the openness of LLG more congenial than Jim's pivotal role in
the old TLI (I have not been in contact with it recently, so I do not
know directly how it appears to correspondents now). It seems to me that
somewhere along the way, JCB's self-esteem got tied up in a big way with
being the king-pin of HIS language, and the community has suffered
thereby: thus far (zo'o) Bob seems to have avoided this trap. 

But I look forward to the time when we can acknowledge JCB's seminal
role, (and feel that he is hearing our acknowledgement), while yet
knowing that he recognises that his bangu panzi is grown-up and can
stand on its own feet.