ideologies and Philosophies about Lojban: Difference between revisions

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:


'''foi'a''' [[jbocre: FA|FA]] tags sumti that is ur-x1 (before SE conversion).
* [[jbocre: hardliners|hardliners]]
* [[jbocre: fundamentalism|fundamentalism]]


'''foi'e''' [[jbocre: FA|FA]] tags sumti that is ur-x2 (before SE conversion).
* [[jbocre: naturalism|naturalism]]
* [[jbocre: transcendentalism|transcendentalism]]


'''foi'i''' [[jbocre: FA|FA]] tags sumti that is ur-x3 (before SE conversion).
* [[jbocre: On Grunge and conflict resolution|On Grunge and conflict resolution]]
* [[jbocre: Grice Salvator|Grice Salvator]]


'''foi'o''' [[jbocre: FA|FA]] tags sumti that is ur-x4 (before SE conversion).
* [[jbocre: On the baseline conformance imperative|On the baseline conformance imperative]]
* [[jbocre: SWism|SWism]] = whorfianism


'''foi'u''' [[jbocre: FA|FA]] tags sumti that is ur-x5 (before SE conversion).
* [[jbocre: Vulcanism|Vulcanism]]
* [[jbocre: Progressivism|Progressivism]] favours a baseline that changes for the better.
 
* [[jbocre: Conservatism|Conservatism]] favours a baseline that doesn't change at all.
** ''I think you mean a ''language'' that does or does not change. A baseline is by definition a snapshot of the language at one moment. The issue then is about freezing the language at a baseline, or not. --[[User:xod|xod]]''
 
** I keep on hearing conflicting stories. If a baseline is not necessarily frozen, then presumably it can change. Anyway, I don't mean a ''language'' entire that does or does not change. I mean an explicitly and published ''grammar'' that does or does not change. --[[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]


----
----


Using foi'V saves having to compute the renumberings of places resulting from SE conversion. It may be just a problem with my mental wiring, but I find SE conversion hard to compute, and multiple SE really scrambles my circuits. --[[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]
In brief:
 
* [[jbocre: hardliners|hardlinerism]] preaches rigorous definition of semantics and usage that scrupulously adheres to those rigorous definitions.
* [[jbocre: naturalism|naturalism]] preaches using and treating Lojban as a natural language: it is something to be explored through usage, and should grow organically rather than be formally defined in ways beyond what is set down in the baseline.
 
* [[jbocre: fundamentalism|fundamentalism]] preaches that it is a sin to propose any elements of the language design that deviate from the baseline
 
Naturalism and hardlinerism are incompatible, but all other possible combinations of these ideologies are attested in one Lojbanist or another.
 
--[[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]
 
----


But... but... Why not just leave out the SE and use the regular FA tags?
Has anyone beside me noticed that Nick turns up as a Hardliner and a Naturalist? In discussion with And, [[User:xod  (xod|xod  (xod]]) realized that this faction classification system could bear one more fine tuning pass. Hence, I am creating at least one more position, [[jbocre: SWism|SWism]], to sort of replace some of [[jbocre: transcendentalism|transcendentalism]] and maybe [[jbocre: naturalism|naturalism]], but which I think is more conceptually coherent. --[[User:xod|xod]]


(I do wish people would sign their contributions. I like to know who's speaking.) Anyway, the answer is mainly that in sumti tails SE conversion is the only option. Maybe if ''jai fi broda'' were an alternative to ''te broda'', that argument would evaporate. I should add, too, that I am not actively advocating ''foi'V'' -- rather, I'm still seeking the optimum balance between the concision-but-complexity of identifying sumti places by position and the longwindedness-but-simplicity of identifying sumti places by FA. I haven't yet hit on anything that feels satisfactory. --[[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]
* [[jbocre: SWism|SWism]]

Revision as of 16:52, 4 November 2013

  • Conservatism favours a baseline that doesn't change at all.
    • I think you mean a language that does or does not change. A baseline is by definition a snapshot of the language at one moment. The issue then is about freezing the language at a baseline, or not. --xod
    • I keep on hearing conflicting stories. If a baseline is not necessarily frozen, then presumably it can change. Anyway, I don't mean a language entire that does or does not change. I mean an explicitly and published grammar that does or does not change. --And Rosta

In brief:

  • hardlinerism preaches rigorous definition of semantics and usage that scrupulously adheres to those rigorous definitions.
  • naturalism preaches using and treating Lojban as a natural language: it is something to be explored through usage, and should grow organically rather than be formally defined in ways beyond what is set down in the baseline.
  • fundamentalism preaches that it is a sin to propose any elements of the language design that deviate from the baseline

Naturalism and hardlinerism are incompatible, but all other possible combinations of these ideologies are attested in one Lojbanist or another.

--And Rosta


Has anyone beside me noticed that Nick turns up as a Hardliner and a Naturalist? In discussion with And, xod (xod) realized that this faction classification system could bear one more fine tuning pass. Hence, I am creating at least one more position, SWism, to sort of replace some of transcendentalism and maybe naturalism, but which I think is more conceptually coherent. --xod