Subject: Re: [lojban] nilbroda

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 21:12:35 -0500

At 08:37 PM 02/25/2001 -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote:
>It's still not clear to me. For a non-variadic nilbroda, what is the
>convention? Should I go by the reference grammar, which puts ni2 at the 
>end, or
>the dictionary, which puts it second?

The answer is that you get to decide for yourself. The reference grammar 
states a non-binding convention. The draft dictionary contains some 
attempts to define words, but those attempts are not "baselined" and in 
fact have for the most part never been reviewed for consistency with the 
rules. (Nora started once, but found after several hundred words that her 
understandings of the rules was changing and that thus her analysis was 
inconsistent - she has not had time to start over again.)

If usage clearly points towards one approach or the other, then probably 
that approach will tend to predominate in the final dictionary, because 
usage trumps theory with respect to dictionary word meanings.

lojbab
--
lojbab [email-masked]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org