Re: Lojban

On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 12:37:09 -0400, Dana Nutter \ deinx nxtxr
<li_sasxsekREMOVETHIS@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>li [Bob LeChevalier] mi tulis la ...
>
>
>> >Rest snipped for brevity. If you choose not to answer the question,
>> >kindly say so!
>> 
>> I am saying that there are so many answers that no answer that I would
>> give would necessarily be correct and unchallengeable.
>
>So give a few of the better answers.  A language needs to be
>able to express these things, and do so without a speaker having
>to stop and analyse or philosophize about the precise meaning of
>something.  

Exactly. We do this all the time on the conlang lists. Little
translation exercises where we have to devise new words (sometimes for
concepts we know must exist in the language's culture; sometimes for
entirely new cultural concepts) on the fly. If dozens of us whose
languages are nowhere near the venerable age or state of development
of Lojban can do it, surely a competent Lojbanist should be able to do
it too!

Padraic

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com