From jcowan@reutershealth.com Sat Oct 05 09:12:43 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_2_0); 5 Oct 2002 16:12:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 27176 invoked from network); 5 Oct 2002 16:12:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Oct 2002 16:12:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Oct 2002 16:12:43 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17xrbD-0005e9-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 09:16:15 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17xraf-0005dr-00; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 09:15:41 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 05 Oct 2002 09:15:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [65.246.141.151] (helo=mail2.reutershealth.com) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17xrab-0005dg-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 09:15:38 -0700 Received: from skunk.reutershealth.com (IDENT:cowan@[10.65.117.21]) by mail2.reutershealth.com (Pro-8.9.3/Pro-8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA02035; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 12:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200210051623.MAA02035@mail2.reutershealth.com> Received: by skunk.reutershealth.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 5 Oct 2002 12:10:53 -0400 Subject: [lojban] Re: a new kind of fundamentalism To: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 12:10:53 -0400 (EDT) Cc: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: from "And Rosta" at Oct 05, 2002 02:51:51 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 1920 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jcowan@reutershealth.com Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: John Cowan Reply-To: jcowan@reutershealth.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=8122456 X-Yahoo-Profile: john_w_cowan And Rosta scripsit: > > Lojban may eventually start to evolve in the way natlangs do, but that > > can only occur in a genuine way when there is a large body of > > quasi-native speakers, and this cannot happen if people start tinkering > > with the language. > > Are there any current examples of actual tinkerings that present > an actual impediment to the emergence of a large body of quasi- > native speakers? It is the fact of tinkering, rather than any specific example thereof, that constitutes a disincentive to learning; without learning, there can be no such large body of speakers. People do not want to learn things that will become massively obsolete soon. > Technically, the BNF 'grammar' is more like a grammaticality-checker > than a true grammar. That is, it will tell you whether or not a > string is well-formed Lojban, but it won't tell you what it means. Well, this is an equivoque on "grammar". Computer types use the word "grammar" in precisely this sense. -- John Cowan jcowan@reutershealth.com www.reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan "The exception proves the rule." Dimbulbs think: "Your counterexample proves my theory." Latin students think "'Probat' means 'tests': the exception puts the rule to the proof." But legal historians know it means "Evidence for an exception is evidence of the existence of a rule in cases not excepted from."