Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: ro prenu na ku daplu

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 13:10:13 -0400

At 04:11 PM 9/25/01 +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> >>> "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]> 09/24/01 01:37am
>#At 12:34 AM 9/24/01 +0100, And Rosta wrote:
>#>Nick:
>#> > One thing: you're insisting on {zei} because you want to sidestep the
>#> > potential ambiguity of tanru, or because you don't want to look up 
>the Evil
>#> > that is rafsi?
>#>
>#>I don't want to use tanru. I don't want to look up short rafsi. And I
>#>avoid 5-letter rafsi so as to make it easier for others to look up the
>#>constituent parts. I also approve of lujvo glue as a matter of principle.
>#
>#This sounds a bit strange, coming from someone who is arguing that we don't
>#have enough allowance for Zipfean shortening.
>
>The fact that I dislike the rafsi system, which happens to be Lojban's
>sole zipfean mechanism, is not incompatible with my thinking there
>should be other better zipfean mechanisms.
>
>At this stage I think that type 4 fuhivla and string-abbreviating 
>experimental
>cmavo are our best hope, but if I could rewrite history I would have made
>all gismu CCV and used any C as lujvo glue (CCV-C-CCV).

You may want to check out Rex May's loglang Ceqli,
http://www.geocities.com/ceqli/
since he came to a similar conclusion, though I don't know where he went 
with it (he discusses it on alt.lang.artificial). Of course that sort of 
lujvo is anti-Zipfean, since it is longer than the metaphor that it 
supposedly compresses.

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