[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
{gliban} vs {inglic}
- To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
- Subject: {gliban} vs {inglic}
- From: Ivan A Derzhanski <IAD@BGEARN.BITNET>
- Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 12:56:44 BG
- In-reply-to: Message of Thu, 21 Dec 1995 10:52:31 GMT from <dwiggins@BFSEC.BT.CO.UK>
- Reply-to: Ivan A Derzhanski <IAD@BGEARN.BITNET>
- Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
On Thu, 21 Dec 1995 10:52:31 GMT Don Wiggins said:
>Sometimes it seems that English usage dominates lojban.
>(.eicai) We must strive to prevent this. [...]
>
>The use of "gliban." for English is the one area were lojban usage dominates.
Ah, but the very existence of the gismu {glico} (without which the cmene
{gliban} wouldn't exist either) certainly has to do with the dominant-ish
status that English has (along with the rest of the source languages and
some others). So Lojban dominates indirectly, in a manner of speaking.
--Ivan