[lojban] Re: a new kind of fundamentalism

[John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>]

Robert LeChevalier scripsit:

> The advantage I see to the Elephant is that it records each issue in a 
> structured manner so someone can come along later and see whether anything 
> was resolved.  (Now maybe my concept of the elephant is not everyone 
> else's, but that is what I would use it for).

That is indeed what it was intended for.  Not only can you find out *what*
was decided, but what the alternatives considered were, and what the arguments
pro and con each alternative were.  Just as important, you can ignore whatever
parts of this you wish.

> That sounds like an informal version of the Elephant.  But I would suggest 
> abiding by our non-standard distinction between "grammar" and 
> "semantics".  Any discussion of semantics is not a "grammatical issue" - 
> the Lojban grammar is baselined and frozen and semantics discussions do not 
> affect that baseline.

Some semantic distinctions are also frozen (you and I had this discussion
a decade or more ago):  the distinction between "mi" and "do", or between
"pa" and "re", is semantic (it does not affect the YACC or BNF) but is
quite frozen.

-- 
Deshil Holles eamus.  Deshil Holles eamus.  Deshil Holles eamus.
Send us, bright one, light one, Horhorn, quickening, and wombfruit. (3x)
Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa!  Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa!  Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa!
  -- Joyce, _Ulysses_, "Oxen of the Sun"       jcowan@reutershealth.com

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Plan to Sell a Home?
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/MVfIAA/GSaulB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/