[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Ow! Hot, hot!
************************ WARNING! WARNING! ***************************
*************** IGNITION IMMINENT! IGNITION IMMINENT! ****************
>Ron Hale-Evans writes [regarding a humor piece on "SUPERL":
>>I sent a xerox of this piece to Bob LeChevalier
>>(lojbab@snark.thyrsus.com), prime mover behind Lojban, but he didn't
>>think it was very funny. I wonder why?
lojbab writes:
>Who me? I never saw this before tonight, as far as I can recall.
Lojbab, I spoke to you about it on the phone!
lojbab writes:
>Actually I think it rather cute, if not particularly deep, and bristle
>more at the Big-Brother-ism that is implied in the last paragraph, which
>isn't that funny in these days of 'political correctness'. The funniest
>lines are the most ridiculous - puns about count nouns and mass nouns,
>etc. But that may be my taste in humor.
Now THAT'S funny! :) It was precisely the reverse for me; I found the puns lame
and basically throwaway, but I thought the last paragraph was at the core of
the story! :)
As for the term "political correctness", I suggest that those who want to test
the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis look a little closer at how it may apply to their
own lives. :)
lojbab writes:
>If Ron is merely politely suggesting that I take myself and Lojban too
>seriously, he is both correct and incorrect.
:) Didn't think I was being too polite. And what happened to the fabled Law of
the Excluded Middle? That I am both correct and incorrect seems a bit...
illogical? But apparently not illojical. :) :) :)
[bulk of lojbab's lojban apologetics omitted]
lojbab:
> ... I've
>had to try to give myself a degree's worth of education in my (copious
>:-( spare time. This doesn't leave a lot of time or energy for taking
>the subject lightly, but I still do.
and later, same posting:
>My interest and purpose in working on Lojban isn't light-hearted.
More lojic? :) Actually, I tend to concur more with lojbab's *second* opinion
of his attitudes. Lojbab, I respect the enormous amount of work you have put
into lojban, but, JEEPERS! lighten up, willya? You'll attract more spies with
vinegar than with honey, and Lojbanistan seems to be riddled with intrigue,
ripe for a counterrevolution. :)
lojbab:
> I'm
>trying to ensure that a work of genius, James Cooke Brown's Loglan
>language concept, have a chance to achieve its goals. I am doing so, as
>many know, under rather un-humorous circumstances. I, along with many
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>others, split with JCB because we believe his policies and attitudes
>have prevented Loglan's success, cheating those of us who have put time
>and effort into making Loglan work.
Sigh. Yes, I understand that it must be very painful to be dragged through
court. From outside Lojbanistan, though, the Loglan/Lojban dispute seems
something like the fighting between the People's Front of Judea and the Judean
People's Front. :) (Note for the humor-challenged: see *Monty Python's Life of
Brian*.)
Foghorn Leghorn: "That's a joke, son, ah say, that's a joke. Funny, like.
You're s'posed ta laugh. Ah, c'mon boy! Say, what's that you're readin'? *How
to Split the Atom*?!?!"
Ron H-E writes:
>>[The following "Non-Fact Article" appears in the science fiction
>>anthology *Universe 10*, edited by Terry Carr, published in hardcover by
>>Doubleday & Co. and in paperback by Zebra Books. It is copyright (c)
>>1980 by Terry Carr, and appears here without the permission of the
>>publishers.]
>>
>> SUPERL
>> Charles E. Elliott
lojbab:
>I want to also add that I am ethically opposed to such distribution of
>copyrighted text without permission, especially since Ron is making it
>clear that he knows the text is copyright and that it is available
>commercially in a manner that respects the author's rights.
[paragraph of opinions on intellectual property rights deleted]
>I thus cannot condone rampant posting of copyrighted texts such as this
>one on the net.
Ah. Well, that's unfortunate. I don't think the text *is* available in *any*
manner, except through used bookstores and those libraries that have the book.
*Universe 10*, like many other SF anthologies, was almost as ephemeral as a
monthly SF magazine. As far as I can tell, it's out of print. Haven't seen a
new edition in years.
I'll also point out that it's not the author's rights we "ought" to be worried
about here; it's the anthologist's. That's right, the text is copyrighted by
the anthologist, not the author (check the attribution again). Gee, could it be
that "intellectual property rights" sometimes work against the best interests
of the author? Naw, that could never happen in the Land of the Free... :)
I'll also also point out that it's not the anthologist's rights we "ought" to
be worried about here either; it's his estate's. Terry Carr is d e a d. But we
as conlangers need not question today's perfectly valid biases, like
"intellectual property" or the inheritance laws, right? Just the obsolete ones,
like the sexism inherent in languages developed during the 19th century. :)
lojbab:
>Returning to the SUPERL concept, as interpreted by Ron:
>>*Why* can't we create a language where grammatical correctness implies
>>factual correctness? (Douglas Hofstadter is great for this stuff; see
>>*Goedel, Escher, Bach*.)
>Nora points out that this is trivial to achieve.
[details omitted; see original post!]
Well, she makes a terrific and *funny* point. Thanks, Nora! I have rued this
sentence above more than any of the others from that posting. I reiterate: it
was a rhetorical question. (Hence the pointer to *GEB*.)
lojbab:
>One last item, on "mu". The Lojban "su", which is the metalinguistic
>discourse eraser, is derived from this. Unless quoted with the strong
>quote "zo", or embedded in non-Lojban text, it erases to the beginning
>of the current discourse. This either allows the speaker to start over
>again fresh, to change the subject, or to "unask the question". Spoken
>by a listener in response to a speaker, it is a pointed hint. Multiple
>"su"s can erase several levels of discourse.
>su
>su
>----
>lojbab = Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
> 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA
> 703-385-0273
> lojbab@snark.thyrsus.com
Ah, lojbab! You won't erase my discourse *that* easily! (What was that about
"political correctness" and "Big Brotherism"?) :)
P.S. Why do you use an apostrophe instead of an h?
Kun multaj ridetoj,
Ron Hale-Evans
P.S. Break out the asbestos, honey, he's gonna post another message! (Conlangs
and creoles and codes, oh my...)