From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Fri Sep 14 18:08:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 15 Sep 2001 01:08:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 76579 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2001 00:34:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Sep 2001 00:34:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta02-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Sep 2001 00:34:29 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.253.84.163]) by mta02-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010915003427.NONA29790.mta02-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for ; Sat, 15 Sep 2001 01:34:27 +0100 Reply-To: To: Subject: RE: [lojban] A revised ce'u proposal involving si'o (fwd) Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 01:33:42 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <111.54059ad.28d160b1@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" pc: > nicholas@uci.edu writes: > And if you wanted Lojban to be only > about Sapir-Whorf and getting it speakable, and not about logical > quibbling and rigour, then I am yet again forced to ask And's question: > Why did you pick a logic-based conlang to start with? You could have > dispensed with all the logic quibbling, and still gotten your Sapir-Whorf > effects, if you'd worked with Laadan.) > > In fairness to Lojbab, he is stuck with what he inherited from Jim to a > certain extent -- and that includes a mass of confusions. As for Laadan, it > is clearly too inchoate to be much use as a conlang. Not too inchoate by Lojbab's standards. For Lojbab, the more inchoate the better -- the more inchoate the language is, the more there is for Usage to Decide. --And.