From arntrich@stud.ntnu.no Sun Aug 12 10:48:51 2001
Return-Path: <arntrich@stud.ntnu.no>
X-Sender: arntrich@stud.ntnu.no
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 12 Aug 2001 17:48:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 51379 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 17:48:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27)
  by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Aug 2001 17:48:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO brev.stud.ntnu.no) (129.241.56.70)
  by mta2 with SMTP; 12 Aug 2001 17:48:50 -0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
  by brev.stud.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47928804B
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 19:48:49 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from jeeves.stud.ntnu.no (jeeves [129.241.56.14])
  by brev.stud.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A920E8041
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 19:48:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (arntrich@localhost)
  by jeeves.stud.ntnu.no (8.10.0.Beta12/8.10.0.Beta12) with ESMTP id f7CHmm528485
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 19:48:48 +0200 (MEST)
X-Authentication-Warning: jeeves.stud.ntnu.no: arntrich owned process doing -bs
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 19:48:48 +0200 (MEST)
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Chomskyan universals and Lojban
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0108121947440.28372-100000@jeeves.stud.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-10
From: Arnt Richard Johansen <arntrich@stud.ntnu.no>

It has been suggested -- among others by the person, whose name escapes
me, who reviewed _the Complete Lojban Language_ in _Journal of
Linguistics_ -- that the Lojban prescription may run counter to the
so-called "linguistic universals". Linguistic universals, in case you
want to know, are the properties that the Chomskyan school of
linguistics believe to be common to all languages -- and, in fact,
hardwired into the design of the human brain.

Are any of you familiar with these theories? Can you name any universal
that Lojban violates? Can Lojban be used as a test of whether
"Mentalese" exists? If the current theory of language acquisition holds
true, what would the difference be between Lojban as we speak it, and
Lojban as used by a person who has acquired it as a first language from
someone who speaks Lojban as we speak it?

-- 
mu'o mi'e tsali


