From xod@thestonecutters.net Wed Oct 09 09:52:52 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_2_0); 9 Oct 2002 16:52:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 10075 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2002 16:52:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Oct 2002 16:52:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Oct 2002 16:52:52 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17zK8h-00033s-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 09 Oct 2002 09:56:51 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17zK86-00033a-00; Wed, 09 Oct 2002 09:56:14 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 09 Oct 2002 09:56:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.111.194.10] (helo=granite.thestonecutters.net) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17zK82-00033Q-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2002 09:56:10 -0700 Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g99Gq6Y24358 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 12:52:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 12:52:06 -0400 (EDT) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: The Future Jbotreya (was: Why linguists might be interested in Lojban (was: a new kind of fundamentalism)) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021009054028.03135e20@pop.east.cox.net> Message-ID: <20021009124922.X23951-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 2033 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Invent Yourself Reply-To: xod@thestonecutters.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > At 11:12 PM 10/8/02 -0400, Invent Yourself wrote: > >On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > > > You can detect incompleteness. > > > >Is Lojban incomplete? > > Yes. The jboske discussions that result from "How do you say X"?" indicate > this. (Not the fact that they exist, but the fact that often there is no > ready answer.) Aren't you conflating the incompletion of the language with the ignorance of the students? Or are you using some tricky philosophical result such as "if a language is defined on paper and no one speaks it, is it really a language?" > > > In terms of current Lojban, my guess is that a level 4 person, when > > > confronted by ANY "how to say it" question that is worthy of weeks of > > > jboske debate would know the answer off the top of his head, and it would > > > be unarguably correct. (A level 5 speaker could come up with multiple ways > > > to say it and explain the pros and cons and nuances of each in terms that > > > everyone would recognize as unarguably correct > > > >Isn't it exciting to imagine such a thing? > > Yes. But I don't expect to see it in this generation. That's not the spirit! -- Before Sept. 11 there was not the present excited talk about a strike on Iraq. There is no evidence of any connection between Iraq and that act of terrorism. Why would that event change the situation? -- Howard Zinn