[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Why Lojban fails



On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 12:13 PM Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:

Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 18:01:38 UTC+3, Mike S. escreveu:

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 9:55 AM 'John E Clifford' via lojban <lojban@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Oh, my!  I merely meant to drop a friendly reminder that Lojban could not achieve its goal as presently constituted.  KI learn (I’ve been away a while) Lojbanists (of some sort or other or maybe all) no longer car about its primary goal, monoparsing, but are concerned to make a viable language out of the scraps.

Do you have evidence that the Lojbanist community as a whole has abandoned the goal of "monoparsing" (which I take to mean self-segregating morphology and unambiguous grammar)? 

I have one. When I asked about inconsistencies in the PEG grammar I was given an answer that some semantic parser should do that job. However, no such parser was envisioned at that time. So yes, it's avoiding the topic of not abandoning it at all.

This is your evidence that monoparsing has been abandoned?  If monoparsing were abandoned, no one would be writing PEG grammars in the first place. 


Even within ordinary AST system there are no discussions of internal grammar of UI or fu'e. It's a topic for geeks maybe that's the reason.

Or of PA.  Meanwhile, it seems to me that BAI and FA and others could have been combined.  So yeah the syntactic categories could have been both split and lumped differently.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/CAOYwWb1TC3OVT3bOmDLByHmFzYW4ihrePS582Ftb1mtV7T%3Dacg%40mail.gmail.com.