Subject: Re: [lojban] multiple choice questions

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 04:32:58 EDT

In a message dated 6/5/2001 8:26:36 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> <Stop sugar-coating everthing and tell us what you really think...>

I doubt you really want that, but if you insist...

<Since lojban has sets and sequences "built-in," I'd say constructions using 
them are very much in the spirit of lojban.  It's not longer than the {ji} 
version, or particularly difficult to
understand.  So what, in particular, is your objection?  Having a 
less-than-direct translation to English wouldn't hold much water.  And I 
can't believe you'd say that it has 'too much logic' in it...>

JCB would be unhappy to hear this, but Lojban/Loglan is awfully SAE in many 
ways, including all that set and sequence stuff. So, they are not uniquely 
or distinctively lojbanic. {ji} is. I have no objections to the other form; 
it works well in English and most other European langauge, and it works in 
Lojban. But I tend to use "Lojbanic" for expressions that catch the special 
features of Lojban: {mi prami do} doesn't seem very Lojbanic in that sense.  
In short, I wasn't objecting to your sentence, but to (Robin CA's?) claim 
that it was "very lojbanic." (It is also longer than the {ji} version, butI 
don't think that is terribly important, any more than the missing {tu'a} in 
both versions.)