Re: Lujvo work in progress

[lojbab@grebyn.com (Logical Language Group)]

Not sure I know what you mean by cross-indexing - multiple versions
for tyhe same concept?  Likewise "Lean Lujvo" since I haven't read your
papers, though I can guess what you mean.  I expect that you have pretty
near all the texts, modulo your missing archive months, and most of what
appeared in those months was either phone game (i.e. minimal text) or
revisions of earlier texts.  I doubt that a check will give more than
about half of those on the list I gave you as being legitimately new
entries because of the revision factor - I can only go by the file date,
since I merge revisions i twith the original in my files, I get the revision
and the original all together, along with all proposals for the lujvo
along the way.

I respect you fro being disillusioned.  The only thing the Eaton crap made
me do even when I was still working on JCB's version of Loglan, was want to
redo the whole thing properly.  However, since the files are initialled, you
will find that certain people did better than others, and .pc will probably
be better than most.   .fr is Faith Rich, and will doubtless be worse than most
- she did volume but not quality.

pc oonce said that most lujvo-makers are dictionary-definers - they make
lujvo that look like dictioary definitions, rather than trying to phrase
the concept in the new language. fr is one of the worst of these.  But then
she WAS 87 years old, and working hard, so it is hard to say ill of such a
person.  You just politely look the stuff over , and forget it when appropriate.
And some of her proposals are worthwhile.  I might say that 10-20% of the Eaton
work may be worth transferring, and perhaps even more%^)  Don't fret if the
lookover makes you not want to tackle it for this dictionary go-round.  It
can easily wait till next round, and we CAN do it right (as  well as perhaps 
having the option of JCB's later work on the subject - he is threatening to
publish his revised on-line dictionary soon.

lojbab