From pycyn@aol.com Mon Sep 23 06:31:38 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 23 Sep 2002 13:31:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 67805 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2002 13:31:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 23 Sep 2002 13:31:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m04.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.7) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Sep 2002 13:31:37 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.10.) id r.f4.22209063 (4584) for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 09:30:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 09:30:30 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: cmavo for emphasis? To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_f4.22209063.2ac07176_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_f4.22209063.2ac07176_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 9/23/2002 7:44:12 AM Central Daylight Time, arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes: << > I find it annoying that pointless prejudices, such as that in English > against split infinitives, have taken root in Lojban culture too. Such a > prejudice is > that against {du}. >> The "prejudice against {du}" has two roots, at least. 1) The need to get people to start thinking predicately rather than argumently, seeing predicates as the main blocks, not nouns. In fewer words, breaking SAE grammar habits. 2) The logic of {du} espressions is more complex than that of predicates expressions and we like the simplicity. I suspect that And is right and that, should Lojban have an independent existence, {du} structures will appear spontaneously in many situations, emphasis being an obvious case. BUT while we are learning the language, we should learn the prescribed langauge; once we master it, we can do with it what we will. One of the reasons that I tolerate xorxes oddities -- while warning everyone else against them -- is precisely that xorxes has mastered the langauge, at least so far beyond anyone else now active that we are not in a position to criticize (except to note that it is not the Lojban we should be learning yet). [He is sometimes just flat wrong for all of that.] --part1_f4.22209063.2ac07176_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 9/23/2002 7:44:12 AM Central Daylight Time, arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes:

<<

I find it annoying that pointless prejudices, such as that in English against split infinitives, have taken root in Lojban culture too. Such a prejudice is
that against {du}.

>>
The "prejudice against {du}" has two roots, at least. 1) The need to get people to start thinking predicately rather than argumently, seeing predicates as the main blocks, not nouns. In fewer words, breaking SAE grammar habits. 2) The logic of {du} espressions is more complex than that of predicates expressions and we like the simplicity.
I suspect that And is right and that, should Lojban have an independent existence, {du} structures will appear spontaneously in many situations, emphasis being an obvious case. BUT while we are learning the language, we should learn the prescribed langauge; once we master it, we can do with it what we will. One of the reasons that I tolerate xorxes oddities -- while warning everyone else against them -- is precisely that xorxes has mastered the langauge, at least so far beyond anyone else now active that we are not in a position to criticize (except to note that it is not the Lojban we should be learning yet). [He is sometimes just flat wrong for all of that.]
--part1_f4.22209063.2ac07176_boundary--