Re: [lojban] An opinion against Lojban/Loglan

[Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>]

On Friday, February 24, 2012 05:20:48 gleki wrote:
> This was posted earlier today in the Russian group of lidepla language.
> The following is written allegedly by Stephen Rice according to the author
> of the group but it's not confirmed by anyone else. Anyway there will be no
> confirmation.
> What's your opinion about the following ?
> 
> Briefly: I don't consider either Loglan or Lojban viable auxlangs.
> They weren't designed for it. Their use of logical predicate
> structure, while making simple sentences easy to produce, also bloats
> the lexicon, because you technically need a new predicate every time
> you change the underlying structure--something regular languages use
> adpositions to do. Unfortunately, they weren't designed for ease of
> derivation, either: Loglanists were originally supposed to chain
> together individual predicate words, much as in Toki Pona. The
> language was designed for that--it still is, despite some retrofits.

Lojban does have adpositions (sumtcita). All members of BAI are prepositions, 
and tense markers can also be used as prepositions.

> From a linguistic standpoint, the relationships differ sharply; as
> logical predicates, however, their structures are identical. Loglan
> mitigated this with a system of case tags, which the Lojbanists
> rejected. My Loglan 2.0 would be based on such a case system.

What does he mean?

Pierre
-- 
Don't buy a French car in Holland. It may be a citroen.

-- 
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.