[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

RE: events which don't exist do, because our gadri don't do what we need (was Re: [jboske] "x1 is a Y for doing x2" (was: RE: Re: antiblotation(was: RE: taksi))



Jordan:
> On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 05:52:07PM -0400, Invent Yourself wrote:
> > On Sat, 31 May 2003, Jordan DeLong wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 02:58:08PM -0400, Invent Yourself wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 31 May 2003, Jordan DeLong wrote:
> > > >
> > > > What does lo da'i broda mean to you?
> > >
> > > That the speaker is feeling the effects of problems in the gadri
> > > system, and trying to hack around it
> >
> > This represents a departure from your customary ultra-conservatism

It makes your conservatism seem less kneejerk & unconsidered than
other people's.

> In one sense, perhaps.  In another sense it doesn't, since I want
> to have a language that is both stable and more formal than natural
> languages.  Failing on either count fails the whole thing
>
> Speaking of which, it's quite weird that in the lojban community
> those of us who are interested in things like the language having
> a formal grammar get labeled as conservative, whereas those who
> want the language to be more like natural languages are considered
> progressive..

That's not how the labels are applied! The labels pertain to one's
attitude to change (in the prescribed/baseline element of the
language). It is somewhat orthogonal to the formalist vs naturalist/organicist
dichotomy. Each of the four categories
defined by these two dichotomies contain some members of the Lojban
community. But the return of Nick has I think driven the community
as a whole in conservative formalist direction, whereas is was
formerly more naturalist.

> > SW-ism should embrace aspects of Lojban that deviate from natlang methods.
>
> That's the theory..
>
> Yet for some reason the SWist position finds itself on the natlang
> side of basically every debate... (including this one)

Looking at how xod's views have changed over the years, I'd say this
isn't strictly true. And other whorfians besides xod have been interested
in mindbending stuff like fuzzy truthvalues for their whorfian value.

What might be true is that people tend to get interested in Lojban
either because they're interested in whorfianism or because they're
interested in formalism.

--And.