comments from Michael Helsem

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@GREBYN.COM>]

Received some comments today from Michael Helsem on JL17.  Since I'm
workinghh on JL18, i don't have time to respond, so I'll type the comments
in and let you guys do it for me - you did a great job so far responding to
John Hodges (more comments are always welcome, of course).

Michael comments on 3 things, Sapir-Whorf, the ckafybarja project, and
'net Lojban'.  The last comment I find a bit obscure, so I wouldn;t mind if
someone can tell me what it means.  From what Michael says in the rest of the
letter, I suspect that responses from Nick and Veijo on these items would be
especially appreciated.

here goes;  pardon my jumble fingers:

1.
... would have more to say on the new SW discussion if not for the
so just let me mention a consideration I have not yet seen addressed by anyone,
and which renders this topic for me a trifle moot.  Viz: >why assume uniformity
of thinking-style among members of a language group<?  Even monoglot Anglophones
out to be able to realize the extent of this differeing, which surely far out-
weighs the degree to which inter-language feature-contrasts &/or semantic &/or
(hypothetical) implicit-epistemocosmological variations affect one's thought
patterns.  Or can it be the case that there are only differeing opinions
within a single world-view?  My own take on this is, according to  neo-
(myers-Briggs) Jungian typology, that significant intrinsic differences exist
which transcend race, gender, nationality & language; that these can be
crudely quantified at one usable level, at a number upwards of a dozen;
& that within these groupings some of them are more influenced by their
surroundings (including language i suppose) & some of them less so (my own
inference).  I believe that this has implications, both for  the way quasi-SW
hypotheses need to be phrased, & for the temrs of their provability...


[Lojbab comments - we need to come up with a good statement on what SWH means
by a 'world view', and the thought patterns of a culture.  I certainly so
do not think of SWH as applying to individual thought, and yet this is a most
common question, hence one that we should better address.

]

2. Kalevala/ckafybarja
I guess its a good thing people have found SOMETHING to engage their creative
zest.  My first reaction was: oh, a new game.  I already have one (chess).  And,
uh, it looks like the real game might almost be the game of inventing new
rules for THIS one - an acticity that takes up an inordinate amount of time
and (alas) space & unfolds almost exclusively in English... Recurring
Characters:  unh uh (overly Trekiffied).  We don't need to start thinking
like bad TV scriptwriters!!!

...
I myself LOVE to ckafybarja.  And just to show that my heart is in the
right place (albeit megamiles from EITHER mainstrweam of La Jbotur) i will see
if I can think of anything about those places i have wasted so many of my
unemployed hours in, that feels like a poem or sa story.  But if my favorite
digs has marble table tops and there-s supposed to be wood, I will also
consider the relevance of the distinction


3. Net Lojban

...Well, what does it mean then [ckafybarja] and the net-definition therof]?
That in lieu of a physical community, computer-networking is the next best
thing?  I will refrain from invidious commenting on the backwardness of the
non-wired (such as moi), but this does bring up a relatively separate &
perhaps even more important topic: the runaway galloping sloppiness of Net
Lojban (a dialect in the making).  hadda happen. Shouldn't be bemoaned --
so long as Grammatical Correctness is still attainable through other sources.
Ihave explored a lot of the Zine subculture & there's plenty of bad English
at romp there too.  And nobody take's this for Webster.  End rant.


[I have to admit that this seems especially non-understandable to me because
the overall quality of Lojban text on-net is far above anything that Michael
has ever submitted himself.  Michael's usages often make be long for jimc's
writings, which as people know from my comments on net, are not often good
examples.  Am I missing something is Michael's comment???]

lojbab