From pycyn@aol.com Fri Jul 27 09:12:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 27 Jul 2001 16:12:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 51209 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 16:11:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 27 Jul 2001 16:11:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r08.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.104) by mta2 with SMTP; 27 Jul 2001 16:11:22 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id r.e.1038f78e (3992) for ; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:11:16 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:11:15 EDT Subject: Fwd: [lojban] On a number of parts of threads and single threads disguised as... To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_e.1038f78e.2892eca3_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_e.1038f78e.2892eca3_boundary Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_e.1038f78e.2892eca3_alt_boundary" --part1_e.1038f78e.2892eca3_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/27/2001 10:22:16 AM Central Daylight Time, lojbab@lojban.org writes: > Cowan has expressed his opinion that the appropriate > way to fill in the gaps of the refgrammar is a chrestomathy of approved > A great idea! Alas, it requires 1) usage and 2) approval. The list is about both of these -- not just either one -- and they feed off each other. xorxes affects usage not merely because he writes stuff but also because, when called on something that looks too weird, he is able (usually) to give a reasoned defense of it. And, indeed, he usually has come to his usage from such considerations, rather than by accident or ignorance. Of course, perhaps he -- and certainly some others -- have also been known to continue in a usage -- and perhaps influence other people's usage -- even after that usage has been disapproved, debated down and -- we like to think for the few months the delusion lasts -- buried. If we are going to ahve a chresthomathy, it should be maintained for many years just on the internet, open to constant revision -- mainly expansion, as good usage arises for new cases, but also correction, as old usage is shown flawed and improved on. Also, a pure chresthomathy will not do. Each example needs a note about what problem it solves and what its general rule is. Otherwise, we will have the kind of improper generalization that has plagued several topics in Loglan/Lojban -- the conversion rules being the most famous, I suppose. --part1_e.1038f78e.2892eca3_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/27/2001 10:22:16 AM Central Daylight Time,
lojbab@lojban.org writes:



Cowan has expressed his opinion that the appropriate
way to fill in the gaps of the refgrammar is a chrestomathy of approved
usages; we will no doubt be discussing this at LogFest




A great idea!  Alas, it requires 1) usage and 2) approval.  The list is about
both of these -- not just either one -- and they feed off each other.  xorxes
affects usage not merely because he writes stuff but also because, when
called on something that looks too weird, he  is able (usually) to give a
reasoned defense of it.  And, indeed,
he usually has come to his usage from such considerations, rather than by
accident or ignorance.  Of course, perhaps he -- and certainly some others --
have also been known to continue in a usage -- and perhaps influence other
people's usage -- even after that usage has been disapproved, debated down
and -- we like to think for the few months the delusion lasts -- buried.  If
we are going to ahve a chresthomathy, it should be maintained for many years
just on the internet, open to constant revision -- mainly expansion, as good
usage arises for new cases, but also correction, as old usage is shown flawed
and improved on.
Also, a pure chresthomathy will not do.  Each example needs a note about what
problem it solves and what its general rule is.  Otherwise, we will have the
kind of improper generalization that has plagued several topics in
Loglan/Lojban -- the conversion rules being the most famous, I suppose.
--part1_e.1038f78e.2892eca3_alt_boundary-- --part1_e.1038f78e.2892eca3_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (rly-yd05.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.5]) by air-yd02.mail.aol.com (v79.27) with ESMTP id MAILINYD28-0727112216; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:22:16 -0400 Received: from n9.groups.yahoo.com (n9.groups.yahoo.com [216.115.96.59]) by rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (v79.20) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYD54-0727112203; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:22:03 -0400 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-8974-996247143-pycyn=aol.com@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.4.53] by fl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 27 Jul 2001 15:19:04 -0000 X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 27 Jul 2001 15:19:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 23269 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 15:18:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 27 Jul 2001 15:18:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-1.cais.net) (205.252.14.71) by mta1 with SMTP; 27 Jul 2001 15:18:23 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org (33.dynamic.cais.com [207.226.56.33]) by stmpy-1.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f6RFILZ07673 for ; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:18:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010727110311.00c636c0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: vir1036/pop.cais.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 To: In-Reply-To: References: <20010720214045.C20749@digitalkingdom.org> From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:16:55 -0400 Subject: RE: [lojban] On a number of parts of threads and single threads disguised as several Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit At 03:37 PM 07/27/2001 +0100, And Rosta wrote: >The reason why Lojban List remains a single list (not counting Jbosnu), >rather than lojban list + lojban-tech, is that Lojbab is opposed to >splitting the list. His preferences appear to be (1) technical discussion >doesn't happen, (2) it happens on Lojban list, (3) it happens on Lojban-tech >list. (1) is unreasonable, so it is down to Lojbab that we have (2) rather >than (3). Lojbab is not opposed to technical discussion. I wish it were minimized, because it detracts from people actually using the language (since my last posting on this topic, Cowan has expressed his opinion that the appropriate way to fill in the gaps of the refgrammar is a chrestomathy of approved usages; we will no doubt be discussing this at LogFest). There is at times a lot of energy thrown into technical discussion that goes nowhere, whereas Jorge has certainly found that he has more effect on language usage by using the language to the point that people follow his usage patterns, than he will ever have in technical discussion. I oppose a tech list primarily because I do not want the loss of critical mass on the main list, especially if it means that all of the experienced people working the technical list no longer pay attention to the regular list. I would welcome it if there was a foolproof way of getting a mailing list to sort itself into technical and beginner posts and other categories so that people could filter what they don't want easily, but that is not likely at least while we are using a commercial mail host. (If we had our own mailing list host, we could in theory use software at the host to standardize subject lines to include filterable codes.) lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org 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 To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --part1_e.1038f78e.2892eca3_boundary--