reference grammar

Occasionally, some people will hear about Lojban, thinking that the concept sounds great, but when they look more closely at it, they come to the conclusion (for various reasons) that it is not quite what they expected.

A few will go public on the mailing list and raise their concerns, but most will realize that the large scale language design isn't really up for discussion anymore, and they will just go on with their lives.

Here are some opinions collected off the net:

• Magnus Itland believes that a major failing of Lojban is that t does not have completely orthogonal semantics.
• In a newsgroup thread about the precision of language, Kim G. S. Øyhus simply says that he has started to look into the languages Loglan and Lojban, but hey turned out to be overrated.

• If Lojban really is unambiguously parsable, why haven't anyone been able to prove it in all these years? (anonymous offline person)