Print

Print


Robin Turner wrote:
 
> What makes Lojban difficult is its unfamiliarity - there are hardly any words
> which are exatcly the same as a word in a natlang (though nearly all of them bear
> some resemblance) and the grammar is like nothing else on earth (again with the
> possible exception of Chinese).
 
I don't think it is the vocabulary, and the grammar does
not resemble Chinese as far as I can see. The difficulty
is the argument structure of the verb; there isn't any.
Instead there is a separately defined idiom for every
predicate. Not even English verbs are quite that bad at
being idiomatic instead of following regular patterns.
 
As an example, the simple verb "to walk"; Lojban has:
 
cadzu [ dzu ] walk
     x1 walks/strides/paces on surface x2 using limbs x3
     (cf. stapa, bajra, klama, litru)
 
So, "I walk road hand"?? I fail to see the logic in this.
(Despite having worked in unix for 20 years, where
"grep pattern file" makes sense.) A real language
arranges verbs into relatively few categories of
argument structure, transitive/intransitive/etc.,
and marks arguments using some kind of case system.
Sorry to be negative, but Lojban isn't a realistic option.