Re: [lojban] Response ro Robin's "Essay on the future of Lojban"

[Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>]

And Rosta wrote:
> A language is a system of rules mapping between sounds and meanings.

A language is first and foremost a means of communication (and need not 
use sound BTW)

> What users do should be neither here nor there: the language should be a 
> tool, consisting of a set of sound--meaning correspondence rules, 
> available for whatever use people wish to make of it.
>
> Pierre:
>
> > Can we have some Lojbanists accepting some, but not all, of the 
> > rulings of the BPFK?
>
> The usage of Lojbanists would and should be unregulated. The declaration 
> of Lojban would exist to be used freely however people choose.

A bunch of rules that no one will ever use - sounds like a form of 
mental masturbation (or since this is a group effort, an orgy thereof). 
 But then I've always tended to disparage conlang-making, where the 
process of language-making is the point, and not the result.

Some people do want to work with Lojban as a mental toy, and we have to 
allow for that.  But more, I think, want to communicate with it, which 
is what sets Lojban apart from most of the hundreds of conlangs that are 
out there.

lojbab

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.