George Boeree | Re: [LFN] Freezing the basic grammar

Hellol, Isaac.

We are stabilized as far as grammar and other basics are concerned,
and have been for at least a year now.  We don't all agree with some
of the details (including myself), but further tinkering seems
counterproductive.  Problems are usually solvable contextually, as
they are in all languages.

The "official" stand on vocabulary size is likewise a compromise:
There is a basic vocabulary (highly unlikely to be altered
significantly) which is reflected by the short dictionaries, the
tutorial, and the list of words for learning (the last only in
english at this time - I intend to combine the three sets sometime in
the near future).  Beyond that is the technical vocabulary, an
essentially limitless (for better or worse) list mostly from Greek,
but in the future no doubt drawing from other languages as well (for
example, gourmet and ethnic foods, special trades, engineering, and,
of course, the sciences).  If you (or anyone) find that you really
want to use an "unofficial" word, and putting it on the "parolas
mancada" list doesn't seem to work for you, use the word anyway, in
italics, just like you would a truly non-lfn word.

But I think you are right:  Some kind of strong formal announcement
might send a good message to potential members.

On Apr 26, 2006, at 8:21 PM, Isaac Ben Harush wrote:

> Hello all,
> I used to follow the developments in LFN a while ago, but
> unfortunately got distracted by other activities and obligations.
> This is one reason why this messege is in English... my apologies
> for that. I find myself though drawn to this project again and again,
> mainly because of its elegant design and sheer beauty.
>
> Alright, I have a few questions:
>
> - Was there any disscusion here about anouncing the grammar of LFN
> to be "stable" at some point? Is such a thing planned? I do not mean
> as Esperanto's sacred "Fundamento", but just as an agreement that
> the grammar will not be altered further, unless some new idea makes
> substantial improvement (unlikely). I believe such a formal
> announcement to be beneficial in the eyes of outsiders.
>
> - I believe similar questions have been brought up here, but I really
> would like to know the "official" stand on the desired size of the
> vocabulary. I'm in the camp of "simplest grammar, widest vocabulary".
> I like accuracy and nuances, which I believe affixes and "context"
> can only make an approximation of, unlike "real" words. (Consider,
> "forgive" and "pardon", or "boy" and "son"). But, I must add,
> a wide agreement is much more important to me than these issues,
> and I'd like to know what the community thinks.
>
> Greetings,
> Isaac.
>
> --
> *** LFN *** Lingua Franca Nova *** LFN ***
> Web site: http://www.lingua-franca-nova.net
> WikiWiki: http://lfn.esef.net
> Mailing list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LinguaFrancaNova
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>