From sbelknap@UIC.EDU Mon Dec 09 18:25:29 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 10 Dec 2002 02:25:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 26566 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 02:25:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Dec 2002 02:25:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 02:25:29 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18La5R-0006BL-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 18:25:29 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18La5M-0006Az-00; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 18:25:24 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 09 Dec 2002 18:25:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from larch.cc.uic.edu ([128.248.155.164]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18La5G-0006Aq-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 18:25:18 -0800 Received: (qmail 20690 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 02:25:16 -0000 Received: from webmail.cc.uic.edu (HELO webmail.uic.edu) (128.248.121.50) by larch.cc.uic.edu with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 02:25:16 -0000 X-WebMail-UserID: sbelknap@uic.edu Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:24:52 -0600 To: , raganok@intrex.net X-EXP32-SerialNo: 50000146 Subject: [lojban] Re: What is the meaning of Loglan? Message-ID: <3E052D80@webmail.uic.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: InterChange (Hydra) SMTP v3.62 X-archive-position: 3373 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: sbelknap@uic.edu Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: sbelknap Reply-To: sbelknap@uic.edu X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=810567 >===== Original Message From raganok@intrex.net ===== >>Henceforth, I will refer to LLG's flavor of the language as Loglan when >>writing in English and lojban when writing in lojban. I thank my >>correspondents for pointing out my previous, erroneous practice. > >It is only erroneous viewed through a prescriptivist lens: the court says >Loglan includes Lojban, LLG says Lojban "is" Loglan. > >If you want to be understood, you must look descriptively at the language >you are writing in - in this case, English as used by Lojbanists. You will >see that "Loglan" and "Lojban" have different referents. If you use one >where the other is meant, people will look at you funny. During a brief transition time I will use the phrase "LLG Loglan" so as to distinguish it from TLI Loglan or Jim Carter's Loglan. I trust that this will soon become unnecessary. If others use the word "Loglan" I will interpret that as being LLG Loglan unless they explicitly describe it as TLI Loglan. co'o mi'e la stivn