Re: [lojban] Re: Dialects

[Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com>]

1. I don't think that using {ku} instead of {cu} is enough of a difference from the norm to be considered a dialect. That would mean that the Dot-
Side convention would qualify as well. Being a proponent of the Dot-Side (see my sig.), I would not call it anything more than a convention. Equally I would not call {ku} vs {cu} anything more than a convention.

2. Naming it {lindarbau}, after yourself, sounds EXTREMELY prideful to me, especially since you are not, to my knowledge, the progenitor of the 'teach {ku} first' lesson style, and therefore not the originator of the {ku} vs. {cu} convention, although I do grant that you are it's most (only?) vocal proponent. And before you bring up {xorlo}, that name was not given to it by .xorxes., and .xorxes. is actually somewhat unhappy about it being called that.

3. This entire discussion has been given way too much time. You like using {ku} better. Good for you. I don't. BIG FUCKING DEAL. As long as you are understood, that's what matters. As far as I'm concerned, that's the end of it. fa'o

-- 
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu

-- 
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.