Subject: Re: logical language and usage deciding (was: RE: [lojban] A revised ce'u proposal involving si'o (fwd)

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:17:06 -0400

At 02:25 PM 9/17/01 -0400, Invent Yourself wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote:
>
> > > Otherwise,
> > >it could be argued that participating in debates is a necessary ingredient
> > >of being an expert user. (Of course, there's some circularity here,
> > >because usage that does not reflect the fruits of debates might perforce
> > >be considered nonexpert.)
> >
> > I fear this, making me suspect that those who try to use without paying
> > attention to the debates might end up speaking a different language.
> >
> > Alternatively we may just be on the point of developing a second register
> > in the language, in which case it is purely natural %^)
>
>What is a 2nd register?

A "register" is something like a "dialect" except that it conveys 
connotations of status and/or social rank. Unlike dialects, most people 
naturally speak more than one register, and switch registers based on with 
whom and why they are communicating. "Academic English" is a register that 
we learn in school, and it differs from "street English" or "ghetto 
English" or "The Queen's English", none of which are really dialects but 
different ways that we talk depending on the formality and social 
connotations of the communication.

The more linguistically expert can correct me on details of this explanation.

The point is that we may end up with a colloquial Lojban form existing 
alongside the formal semantic Lojban form, and people will choose one or 
the other based on what they are trying to achieve in communication, even 
when talking to the same people. This is good for "naturalness" in that 
natural languages have multiple registers; it is bad for computer 
processing and possibly even parsing of the language, because words have 
different meanings and connotations in different registers, and sometimes 
the grammar changes as well. I think we can militate against grammar 
change in Lojban when changing register, but I can imagine that, for 
example, the pragmatic interpretation of ellipsis (of ce'u for example) or 
of anaphora like vo'a or ri or even ko'a, could change in a change of 
register, and it might be hard for a computer to recognize such a register 
change.

lojbab
--
lojbab [email-masked]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org