Re: lojban dialectology

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

>>Instead, why not speak the language as defined and let it evolve NATURALLY
>>rather than by intent?
>
>As for speaking the language as defined, OK, OK and OK. But it will NOT
>evolve the way you seem to suggest. Many processes that are commonplace in
>natlangs will
>simply not happen at all in Lojban because of its strictly defined grammar.
>After all, the parser will reject any construct that is not somehow described
>by the Lojban grammar. Hence evolution will be eternally constrained.


Yes and no.  The parser is not going to be used on every bit of Lojban text
ever spoken and written.  Indeed, as the community gets sizable, I envision
that the parser will come to have the same role as the FRench Academy and
American prescriptivists (I think you have an academy down there too to keep
Brazilian Protuguese in line with that of Portugal).  People will "violate"
the parser, and at some point we will have to either stop using the parser,
or make the parser go along with what the community is speaking.  The rule is
that when we baseline after the books are published - the parser and other
 standards of prescription will NOT be changed for at least 5 years.  After that
5 year period, the parser will hgave to follow the community (or at least
mutual respect between the community and the parser-as-prescription will have
to exist), or there will be mothing.  The whole point is that the language
designers will be getting out of the prescription business.

>> When people introduce new proposals by intention, that is
>>NOT The same thing as happens in natlangs.
>
>Hmm, you probably never read poetry :-)


Yes I have.  And that kind of change is good. Becuase a poet does NOT go in
with the idea (I think I'll do this a different way and the whole language
will change to match my model).  Indeed, a poet usually uses an unusual
construct to cause focus on the construct - if it becomes the standard
language, it no longer has the same effect.

One rule of poetry writing is that the poet in general does not spend a
long time after creating his usage arguing on behalf of it.  Indeed, my
expereince is that poets disdain to explain their poetry.  As a result, when
a poet does something non-standard in Lojban it will either be understood
and accepted or it will not.  If it is understood, then it will become part
of the standard language ONLY if it is mimicked elsewhere in usage.  Otherwise
the non-standard usage becomes as nonce as the use of a nonce Lojbanized
name or fu'ivla.

Needless to say, the rate of change, and the rate at which a change is
accepted, is MUCH slower when the usage has to pass by word-of-mouth with
each speaker choosing to adopt or not adopt as the come across it - often not
by conscious consideration.

lojbab