Subject: Re: [lojban] le stura be la gihuste

From: "michael helsem" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:11:03 GMT

>From: "David Twery" <[email-masked]>
li'o
>5271 lujvo, from backemselrerkru (hyperbola) to
>zvastejbu (conference registration table). About 40 of these have >place 
>structures

i would just like to interject that the bulk of these lujvo belong to a 
period in the evolution of lojban usage, in which it was thought necessary 
to coin a lujvo for every english word the speaker was trying to express, 
rather than attempting to formulate original thoughts in lojban. very many 
of them are bad lojban, & i see no need for this labor for the most part 
when equivalent tanru can be coined naturally & understood readily; in fact, 
going through that trouble tends to cast an aura of officialness on them & 
would lead to unfortunate habits of usage were they to become regarded as 
exact equivalents of the english words they were coined to express.

there are indeed lujvo we need, but at the moment i even think a certain 
amount of awkwardness is preferable... in any case we need not await THE 
dictionary before attempting to express ourselves in lojban directly.

that would be like shakespeare not daring to write until samuel johnson came 
along...

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com