Re: lates changes - response to And

[ucleaar <ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk>]

The voice of soapy reason saith:
> >Advocating grammar change in Lojbania is like advocating gun control in
> >the USA; sweet reason neither butters parsnips nor carries the day.  My
> >ambition is to look back in my dotage and tell my grandchildren "See
> >that cmavo?  It was me that got it into the language"
> Come on, And!  Isn't this true for any natural language?

Lojban isn't one, though.

> yet you as a native speaking Professor of English, can almost
> certainly claim greater authority and knowledge of the English language
> than you can of Lojban.

This is probably true, except the bit about me being a professor (at
least not in the British sense). But you & John & Jorge & sundry others
know a far greater fraction of what there is to know about Lojban
than I know of what there is to know about English. To know all there
is to know about Lojban syntax, you just have to be dead clever.

> IF the Lojban design is complete, THEN we should allow no grammatical
> change except through natural linguistic evolutionary processes.

What is complete? A hut is a complete dwelling, but it is not a palace.
You are willing that the hut's roof be fixed if it leaks, but not that
new storeys replete with ornate miradors be added, nor even that it be
given a new coat of paint. Your will is representative of the Lojban
community at large, and you also are at least rirni of the language,
even if you would not consent to be considered a rorci. Therefore what
I say should be interpreted as a lament, not as a complaint.

---
And