Earlier this year, when I was working on criteria for a perfect loglang with constant references to the existing specimens, one of the few flaws in Lojban that emerged early in the study was the proliferation of connectives. For almost all the cases except the sentential ones (basic in logic, whatever may be the case in Lojban) there were clearer ways of handling the situation (some of them remarkably rare, by the way) than using a new connective. Some were even shorter. To be sure, these efficiencies were in a system being built from scratch, without the inertia of 20 years of development, but most look to be adaptable to existing Lojban with some inevitable backward loss.
From: MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2013 8:27 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: The Mad Proposals
I came across it via la gleki on Facebook, but I couldn't figure out how to vote on it in Google Plus or Groups or wherever it is.
mu'o mi'e la stevon
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.