Subject: [lojban] "2moi" crap (was Re: Aesthetics)

From: Jordan DeLong <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:07:13 -0600

On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 10:37:10AM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Jordan DeLong wrote:
> > Also I can't *stand* crap like "2moi". I see it and read "two moi",
> > I can't read it remoi.
> 
> That's just cause you haven't internalized the numbers yet. Rest assured,
> science and the accounting books in "Lojbanistan" are not done with two-
> and three-letter numerical cmavo.

Yes I have internalized the numbers; that's the problem. I've been
speaking english for many years.

> Using the cmavo, even though the CLL does it, is like the arbitrary
> English habit of spelling out numbers less than "fifteen", but using
> digits for numbers over 16. At some point, for numbers large enough to be
> unwieldy, even the most devoted cmavo-lover must break down and use
> digits. But at what threshold?

Note, however, that I mind things like "li 12312.0012" far less
than this "2moi" crap. The former is truely for what you
claim---shorting things when writing them because we're dealing
with long numbers. The latter is just lame; "re" is not harder to
write than "2", and it is *much* easier to read.

No one will ever need to write "12312.0012moi", so the long-number
argument is bogus when applied to it.

-- 
Jordan DeLong - [email-masked]
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku