[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- In jboske@yahoogroups.com, And Rosta <and.rosta@...> wrote: > > I think you should start by setting out the project's aims. Here are some incompatible aims that have come up in previous discussion: > > 1. Create a loglang that is the best possible according to our current state of knowledge. > > 2. Create a loglang that satisfies the key requirement of unambiguously encoding explicit logical forms in a way that is no less concise than the corresponding natlang or Lojban sentences (which are not unambiguous and explicit). > > 3. Design a loglang by means of incremental revisions from Lojban, preserving some sort of backwards compatibility. > > I have the impression that your aim is (3). Others, such as Stevo, favour (1). I favour (2), and because of that I think we don't yet know enough to create a successful loglang, tho that doesn't block work on some areas of the grammar, such as the phonology (-- not such an interesting or important matter for loglangs) or the 'predicaticon' (i.e. the lexicon but leaving the morphophonological aspect of lexical entries blank). > > I'm still interested in discussing (1), tho. I don't see the point of (3), but I guess I'm still interested is discussing the rationale for it. Let's say that by publishing something on (3) I closed that topic. So let's discuss (1). Any ideas? Just a pre-draft would be fine. > > --And. > > > gleki.arxokuna, On 31/07/2012 13:38: > > I created a website http://loccan3.wikinet.org/ > > > > We can develop LoCCan3 grammar and write down ideas there. > > > > Here is http://loccan3.wikinet.org/wiki/The_Loksan_Grammar > > the grammar. > > I just added Pronouns section. > > > > Feel free to improve everything. > > > > >