Subject: [lojban] What the heck is this crap?

From: Robin Lee Powell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 14:27:32 -0800

This message is about a thread on jboske. Here's a particularily
pointful message:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboske/message/712

Ignoring the incredibly rude tone of And's reply, the *content* is
frightening.

To wit: it is the opinion of the old-time experts that

ca ro djedi lo nanmu cu cinba la meris
lo nanmu ca ro djedi cu cinba la meris

are distinct in meaning.

More frighteningly, this implies that:

ca le nu broda kei lo nanmu cu cinba la meris
lo nanmu ca le nu broda kei cu cinba la meris

are distinct in meaning.

And pretty much everyone on jboske seems to agree with it. I don't
normally read jboske, myself; xod pointed this out to me.

This drastically changes the semantics of lojban as I understand them.
As I engage in real-time conversations in the language, albeit with word
lookup, I feel that I understand the basic semantics pretty well.

Given all that, one of the following things is true:

1. The above are not, in fact, distinct in meaning.

2. xod and I are missing something in the Red Book (note in particular
10.23, which directly contradicts the above).

3. An erratta to the Red book is required.

Which is it?

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ http://www.lojban.org/
la lojban. jai curmi roda .einai to ku'i so'ada mukti le nu co'a
darlu le'o -- RLP I'm a *male* Robin.