<polti>

["Steven M. Belknap" <sbelknap@UIC.EDU>]

Seems to me that lojbab & I agree on most issues. I hope those interested
in lojban will read the brief excerpt from the 4th edition of loglan 1 that
I posted. I don't know if I agree with his evolutionary analysis, but I
think he's on to something in his dichotomy of explorers/users for conlang
development. Certainly seems relevant to our recent political postings.

I am still puzzled by apparent contradictory statements lojbab makes
regarding in our discussion of slang:

steven:
>>Seems to me that the rest of unused gismu space will be available for
>>slang, so here goes:
>>
>><polti> [x1 is a political system (means of achieving consensus, resolving
>>conflict or compromising) used by x2 for purpose x3 under authority x4]
>

(This was not a proposal for a formal addition to the lojban gismu. lojbab
has already acknowledged that the gismu were not a formal map of
metaphysical language space. The absence of a gismu for politics is merely
one of many holes that are in gismu-space. Not a big deal. I do rather like
my place structure, however. I have asked native speakers about four of the
seven languages: Arabic, English, Spanish, and Chinese. Obviously, part of
the gauntlet of formal inclusion on the gismu list would require running
the gismu algorithm generator, lots of research on what place structures
are universal, etc. But JCB discusses the construction of slang gismu
independent of the formally constructed list in chapter 6 of loglan 1 4th
ed.; I was curious regarding lojban central's policy regarding slang gismu,
and I am still not sure what it is.)

>I personally will NOT recognize coined gismu slang, notfor the least
>reason that it inevitably will be malglico (don't tell me you looked up
>your concept in 6 languages?)  Your suggestion ranks in my book as somewhere
>slightly better than the Cowan-cited "terki", for the same reasons.
>
>>(Yes, I know I could lujvo or fuhivla this. But what are the plans for
>>unused gismu space? There have been a few other "slang" gismu
>>proposed-obviously these were also not derived via the gismu algorithm. Is
>
>There is to my knowledge only one other such usage of unused gismu space and
>it was explcitly stated by its originator (Goran) to NOT be a change proposal
>but rather more of a "localism" and intended to be dialectal.
>
>The plans for gismu space are EXTREMELY conservative.  Words can be added,
>but only after running a big gauntlet.  because of the tightness of the
>associated rafsi space, the difficulty of doing 6-language research,
>the pitfalls associated with malformation of words (impermissible
>medials and single-feature differences from other gismu), and the fact that
>Lojban is already believed to be too densely packed in it wordspace to
>provide as much redundancy as we would like - all of these are very good
>reasons for thinking 10 times before adding a gismu even if you do not
>buy the anti-change bent of the community.
>
>Given also that the change was proposed in English, in an English language
>context to solve a problem that may exist in English and may not exist
>in Lojban or even other languages, it violates the spirit of "lojban slang"
>as discussed above.  I view continued coinings in this manner as a direct
>challenge to my leadership.  I cannot stop you, and will hardly try, but
>recognize that what you are doing is challenging me, whether that is your
>intent or not, and it belies any words you say that you suipport my leadership.


Sorry, but I couldn't help but laughing on reading this. (I'm not laughing
at you, I'm laughing with you...) A vision of two bull elephants fighting
for mastery of the herd through an argument regarding language usage came
to mind. Sort of a Gary Larsen Far Side cartoon kind of humor. As far as
violating the spirit of lojban slang, it doesn't violate this spirit one
whit. If I were to take this slang and want to make it part of the official
lexicon of lojban, then *that proposal* ought to be in lojban. Slang is
spontaneous and ought be unregulated, in my view.

Are you saying that slang usage is verboten now, but will be tolerated
after baselining? I don't follow what you are saying, as it appears to
contradict your expressed tolerance of slang elsewhere in your postings.

I purposely chose <polti> as a slang usage, because it mimics gismu, and is
decidedly not a part of the formal language. Perhaps you I think speakers
are likely to readily generate slang gismu. Surely you do not propose to
squelch this spontaneous activity *after* baselining!! Perhaps you failed
to understand what I was about. Here is where I am coming from:

1. Slang is a vital omnipresent feature of living languages.
2. Slang serves as an important source of valuable new ideas for accretion
to the formal structure of a language.
3. Much slang is mimicry of legitimate constructs in the language.

>
>making a list of such words for the explicit intent to use them in Lojban
>text is again something that I can't stop anyone from doing, but the
>very making of such a list in effect makes that list an alternate standard
>for the language thatcontradicts the proposed baseline to the extent that it
>is promulgated.

Apparently my intent was not clear to you. Still, there is a hole in lojban
where <polti>, (or the 7-language weighted algorithmically derived
equivalent) ought to be. If the gismu list is frozen, it is now crystal
clear to me that an eventual rebaselining will be necessary, perhaps after
some experience with usage accumulates, and a formal semantic map of the
gismu, fuhivla, tanru, and lujvo is constructed, so as to find the holes.

>
>It is your choice.  I am NOT JCB and do not have or want autocratic control
>over the language.  But I cannot strongly enough convey my repulsion that
>you would advocate "organized slang" in the manner that you have.  And
>I saw no implication of a smiley in your statement, alas.

There is a tone of "look what those horrible speakers are doing to my
beautiful language" about your disapproval. Will your objection to such
subversive language terrorism (that is, slang) continue *after* the
baseline? If so, I am willing to wait until then. Will we have a language
police? Or a "Miss Syntax" column in the lojban journals to advise us on
proper language use?

I do not actually give a darn about whether or not <polti> is made a part
of lojban. I am fully cognizant of how gismu were created in loglan and
lojban. (Perhaps you have forgotten our discussion last summer, when I
mentioned an APL computer program I wrote many years ago to construct
loglan words according to JCB's algorithm).

The point here is I am deliberately introducing a (very small) problem of
the sort that I believe will inevitably occur after baselining to clarify
for you what I see as being an important issue. How will this be handled?
Tolerance and anthropologic note taking?  Consideration by the lojban
academy, when this illustrious body assembles in 5 or 10 years? Pistols at
twenty paces at dawn? Shunning of the offending coiner of slang? Is your
horror just a pre-baselining stance?

>
>pc is right - the posing of a political issue when there are people with
>authority means that inevitably you have pros and cons, polariziation, and
>the likelihood of consensus gets reduced all the time.
>

No, you are both wrong. Incompetently managed change can be disasterous;
competently managed change can be productive. Management requires skills
which that only few people possess, but which many people either think they
have or think are trivial. Many people disparage management, politics, and
bureaucracy both because they have had a good dose of incompetent instances
of these, and because they fail to appreciate that mastery of such human
activities requires considerable diplomatic, psychological, and
organizational skills. (There's a reason for the Master of Management or
MBA degree!)

>I'll keep listening, and hope you did not mean what I understood.

Good. I notice there is no gismu for slang:

<slani>  [x1 is a slang/unofficial word/expression/term in language x2
disapproved by x3] :-)

cohomihe la stivn


Steven M. Belknap, M.D.
Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Medicine
University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria

email: sbelknap@uic.edu
Voice: 309/671-3403
Fax:   309/671-8413