Re: word for "www" (was: Archive location.)

[Nick Nicholas <opoudjis@optushome.com.au>]

cu'u la djorden.

> That said, CLL seemed to me when I read it to be very much in favor
> of lujvo which are literally-devised in a predictable fashion (but
> allowing for removing pieces of the source tanru to shorten them).

CLL has a whopping disclaimer at the front of it, saying that those 
are my ideas, not LLG policy; and lojbab wasn't exactly passionately 
agreeing with them. I think the idea is correct, else I wouldn't have 
advocated it; I've said enough on the wiki and elsewhere about this, 
but I certainly haven't changed my mind. If other Lojbanists choose 
to agree with dikyjvo, bully for them; and the marketplace of ideas 
is where it will get duked out.

> Pre-CLL lojban had plenty of problems (literal lujvo aside), so I
> don't think the implied argument of "it's always been this way, so
> it's the right way" makes any sense whatsoever (especially if you're
> reaching back to the Dark Ages (loglan days) of the language).

.i mi tugni pi ro la'edi'u


--
**** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****
* Dr Nick Nicholas, Linguistics/French & Italian    nickn@unimelb.edu.au *
  University of Melbourne, Australia             http://www.opoudjis.net
*    "Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity of locutional rendering, the       *
  circumscriptional appelations are excised." --- W. Mann & S. Thompson,
* _Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organisation_, 1987.    *
**** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****