From pycyn@aol.com Fri Nov 23 13:30:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 23 Nov 2001 21:30:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 17143 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 21:30:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m12.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 23 Nov 2001 21:30:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r09.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.105) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Nov 2001 21:30:24 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id r.144.51a303b (4007) for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 16:30:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <144.51a303b.293019eb@aol.com> Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 16:30:19 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] presentation of lojban To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_144.51a303b.293019eb_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_144.51a303b.293019eb_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/23/2001 1:37:47 PM Central Standard Time, ragnarok@pobox.com writes: > Talking to computers someday (.a'o'ecai), sapir-whorf, total lack of > irregularities in the grammar, and attitudinal indicators are the big ones > for me. Possibly mention that despite the relative youth of the language, > it already has a few hundred speakers with a discernable culture. Also > perhaps the fact that it is very good at negation, which you really start > to appreciate once you have given it try. > I would add the connection to formal logic and the corresponding clarity and precision that is possible (but not required). I would downplay our community -- by the time it was 45, Esperanto had several million relatively competent speakers and a library of several hundred (perhaps thousand) books; even if you put Lojbans age at 10 or so, Esperanto -- with only the international snail mail of the end of the 19th century -- had many times our number of competent speakers and dozens of books. Of course, Esperanto is a pretty simple and uninformative langauge and so SAE as to make learning and translation easy for other SAEs. Come down heavy on what we definitely have: the grammar; and what we offer as interesting possibilities: attitudinals, s-w, negations, ... --part1_144.51a303b.293019eb_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/23/2001 1:37:47 PM Central Standard Time, ragnarok@pobox.com writes:


Talking to computers someday (.a'o'ecai), sapir-whorf, total lack of irregularities in the grammar, and attitudinal indicators are the big ones for me. Possibly mention that despite the relative youth of the language, it already has a few hundred speakers with a discernable culture. Also perhaps the fact that it is very good at negation, which you really start to appreciate once you have given it try.

I would add the connection to formal logic and the corresponding clarity and precision that is possible (but not required).  I would downplay our community -- by the time it was 45, Esperanto had several million relatively competent speakers and a library of several hundred (perhaps thousand) books; even if you put Lojbans age at 10 or so, Esperanto -- with only the international snail mail of the end of the 19th century -- had many times our number of competent speakers and dozens of books.  Of course, Esperanto is a pretty simple and uninformative langauge and so SAE as to make learning and translation easy for other SAEs.
Come down heavy on what we definitely have: the grammar; and what we offer as interesting possibilities: attitudinals, s-w, negations, ...
--part1_144.51a303b.293019eb_boundary--