Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: non-core translations

From: Robert LeChevalier <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 23:35:36 -0400

At 07:04 PM 8/6/02 -0400, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> > Removing places would be a violation of the standards of the baseline as
> > conveyed to me when we started, and hence would require a higher degree of
> > consensus than I think is possible. If it was in fact agreed, and no
> > example in the CLL enshrines the current place structure, you would have a
> > stronger case than normal, but under the guidelines I've received, I am not
> > considering any such changes and will not do so on my own. We don't have a
> > Lojban academy, so you basically have to convince the whole community and
> > document the change.
>
>Is it possible to *add* places? {remna} denotes a member of a species, and so
>ought to have an x2 for the species, as does {cinfo}; and likewise {panje} if
>used for the animal.

As I said, my interpretation of the mandate given to me is that the place 
structures are baselined are not to be changed. Clarifications make sense 
if the community agrees that they are necessary, and if people agree as to 
what the clarification should be. The standard for a place structure 
change at this late date would likely have to require convincing a 
consensus of the community that the status quo is broken to the point of 
being unusable (which Jorge probably feels about a couple of the gismu).

panje was not necessarily intended to be an animal. Whether you consider 
remna an animal probably depends on your religion/philosophy, and Lojban is 
officially neutral on such things. cinfo was probably a mistake, but since 
so many people question having the species place on any of the 
animals/animals, it is hard to call it a critical mistake sufficient to 
warrant a baseline 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