Re: Rabbity Sand-Laugher

["Adam Raizen" <araizen@newmail.net>]

la pycyn cusku di'e

>I have 
> often commented on the oddity of people taking up "the logical 
language" and 
> then bitching about the logic.

I think that most lojbanists (and if I'm wrong, I speak for myself) 
want a complete language, not an elaborate way of reading logical 
notation, which probably includes stretching the logical apparatus in 
some ways. It certainly includes making the language complete enough 
that it can be used to express "Alice" or any other book. Of all the 
design features of lojban, the logic is only necessary for the logic. 
It is not necessary for testing the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, making 
the language unambiguous in the ways it is, designing a grammar that 
is radically different from other languages, etc. The logic *is* a 
good basis, but to insist on logic and only logic effective condemns 
the language to die.

mu'o mi'e adam