6 ms·

I'm one of the few conversation Lojban speakers, and after years extended study, I've found the language does not meet expectations. When you start deeply expl

by zearen 3y ago

I'm one of the few conversation Lojban speakers, and after years extended study, I've found the language does not meet expectations. When you start deeply exploring the semantics, many constructs are only half defined or nonsensical. Further, the self appointed DFL tries to preserve the language in an unusable state and had alienated most of the proficient speakers. There are other logical languages out there. Most of them are in development, and are discussed in a Discord called the "Logical Languages Lodge". However there is another called Toaq that is almost complete, it at least as complete as Lojban (its vocabulary is still growing, but all of the essential words are there, and the grammar and semantics are complete). If you wish to learn a logical language in 2023, that's the one I'd suggest.

Paianni 3y ago
It would seem Toaq was started by a former Lojbanist, interesting.
IIAOPSW 3y ago
Oh hey I'm in that discord. I'm the one with that weird highly domain specific loglang and occasionally obtusely adversarial question (aka "trolling")
oh_sigh 3y ago
> I'm one of the few conversation Lojban speakers, and after years extended study Honest question...why?
- zearen 3y ago
  Can you clarify your question ?
  - tester457 3y ago
    Fitting question from a Lojbanist.
    - austinjp 3y ago
      Although surely it invites "yes, I can".
      - zearen 3y ago
        Lojban relies on implicit pragmatics just like any language. It's not that it's unambiguous. That's essentially impossible without also making the language impractical. It's precisely ambiguous meaning that one can be precisely as ambiguous as they intend to be, and provide facilities to this end that no other language has.
- EddieEngineers 3y ago
  I didn’t take it that far but asked my parents for the Lojban book for Christmas and did find it fun to work through. Sometimes it’s fun to just nerd out about something totally different to normal :) The year after I got a lockpick tutorial set.
mdaniel 3y ago
Interesting; according to <https://toaq.net/refgram/phonology/ https://toaq.net/refgram/phonology/>: Toaq is a tonal language featuring both syntactic tone and lexical tone. That makes it a hard-pass from me
xena 3y ago
I'd have to agree, it is grammatically logical but it is not semantically logical. Semantical logicalness is the really hard part.

by zearen 3y ago

Paianni 3y ago

It would seem Toaq was started by a former Lojbanist, interesting.

IIAOPSW 3y ago

Oh hey I'm in that discord. I'm the one with that weird highly domain specific loglang and occasionally obtusely adversarial question (aka "trolling")

oh_sigh 3y ago

> I'm one of the few conversation Lojban speakers, and after years extended study Honest question...why?

zearen 3y ago
Can you clarify your question ?
- tester457 3y ago
  Fitting question from a Lojbanist.
  - austinjp 3y ago
    Although surely it invites "yes, I can".
    - zearen 3y ago
      Lojban relies on implicit pragmatics just like any language. It's not that it's unambiguous. That's essentially impossible without also making the language impractical. It's precisely ambiguous meaning that one can be precisely as ambiguous as they intend to be, and provide facilities to this end that no other language has.
EddieEngineers 3y ago
I didn’t take it that far but asked my parents for the Lojban book for Christmas and did find it fun to work through. Sometimes it’s fun to just nerd out about something totally different to normal :) The year after I got a lockpick tutorial set.

mdaniel 3y ago

Interesting; according to <https://toaq.net/refgram/phonology/ https://toaq.net/refgram/phonology/>: Toaq is a tonal language featuring both syntactic tone and lexical tone. That makes it a hard-pass from me

xena 3y ago

I'd have to agree, it is grammatically logical but it is not semantically logical. Semantical logicalness is the really hard part.