From lojbab@lojban.org Wed Sep 11 15:34:40 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 11 Sep 2002 22:34:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 58465 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2002 22:34:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Sep 2002 22:34:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao02.cox.net) (68.1.17.243) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Sep 2002 22:34:39 -0000 Received: from lojban.lojban.org ([68.100.206.153]) by lakemtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20020911223438.USQP12192.lakemtao02.cox.net@lojban.lojban.org> for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 18:34:38 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020911182211.03fa57a0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 18:31:40 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: word for "www" (was: Archive location.) In-Reply-To: <1ad.84403b2.2ab10ee7@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Robert LeChevalier X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab At 05:25 PM 9/11/02 -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 9/11/2002 1:11:59 PM Central Daylight Time, >lojban-out@lojban.org writes: ><< >> > On a parallel note, it's interesting that the people who were around >> > when the notion of lujvo was being developed have a quite different >> > understanding of the intent behind lujvo than those who came much >> > later in the game. Poor communication? >> >>Has anyone besides PC who was around then spoken up on this point? > > >> >Is there anyone besides pc (lowercase, please) who was around then and >still active? >Ah yes, Chassell -- who wisely stays out of this kind of dispute (and just >about all others not involving software). I should note at this juncture that Nora (who dates back almost as far as you pc, and probably further than Chassell) is now a distinct personage (from me) on Lojban List and the net. She hasn't yet gotten up to posting on the list (and the current volume is intimidating her against starting), though perhaps people have noticed her adding to the wiki, but she now is regularly reading. I date back to 1979, and Gary Burgess slightly predates me, since he told me about Loglan. >The problem is partly poor communication, perhaps, but more (I think) a >break in institutional continuity and a small but significant shift in the >demographics of the community. There are, it seems, no longer any >significant number of non-computer people around (I apologize to anyone >that I have missed) and that has led to a more algorithmic approach to >issues than the more humane sort that once was at least present, if not >dominant. Most old lujvo were also literalist, but these were discarded >when a telling metaphor came along -- as it fairly often did when the >concept was useful enough. I think there are a significant number of non-computer people around, but they aren't the ones arguing the issues. We can all imagine what Athelstan would say about a computer-ish concept of lujvo (though whether he is "active" at this point is ambiguous). Ivan of course was the most explicit promoter of other forms of lujvo through his paper on metaphor, which is the underlying basis for the discussion of tanru in CLL. I believe that most of the tanru examples there are unitary words in other languages that were mentioned in Ivan's paper. 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