From lojbab@lojban.org Mon Sep 17 23:48:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 18 Sep 2001 06:48:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 19903 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2001 02:19:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 18 Sep 2001 02:19:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-3.cais.net) (205.252.14.73) by mta2 with SMTP; 18 Sep 2001 02:19:48 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org (dynamic106.cl7.cais.net [205.177.20.106]) by stmpy-3.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f8I2Jg580261 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:19:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010917220716.00b1f6a0@pop.cais.com> X-Sender: vir1036@pop.cais.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:17:06 -0400 To: Subject: Re: logical language and usage deciding (was: RE: [lojban] A revised ce'u proposal involving si'o (fwd) In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010916170032.00db4650@pop.cais.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" 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 lojbab@lojban.org 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