Received: from localhost ([::1]:53312 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YDNNH-0002zW-T6; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:12:56 -0800 Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com ([209.85.215.47]:35174) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YDNNE-0002z7-B6 for llg-members@lojban.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:12:53 -0800 Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id hv19so4252789lab.6 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:12:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=jhh+uO0U1NK/jJbnJHs8K3/7k/SDFaccEKrojgSiNuc=; b=qtifYGBpD3TM8NKejObZ6lECBNz/f2tpgvEQB40hNQ6QnjWvD7AqpOSp+L+v3eujcU qfPqnFCWaQZRXWRxOmFPAWUyzn+9KFF7xlnRzYS3fFO12JcA7ZKCtTuukgrkNozdfdpf ENksCrckx74x+/s6+WE54vZLurtdoY/O5k9LAMcbUfJzCXqSkn0Z3dcS7egIhtk6+O9p udCEaCpxTL2ymQ+hC4X+J+mrv/PPQwVPgvDT+yI63mKbEyG6bsRfME/FG6OQuEvdPRpF +PY481QB2cNHS7O6eIz/ncir73cX8w8W3Cgnvxn8ElFr1EH/t0r5NDV4deRtniVDx6iV /DZA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.8.82 with SMTP id p18mr26671674laa.25.1421716365164; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:12:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.70.212 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:12:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.70.212 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:12:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <0CD5A578A47549238B8B046A01B8846C@gmail.com> <54BCF147.1080803@lojban.org> <54BCFC70.2010805@selpahi.de> Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 01:12:45 +0000 Message-ID: From: And Rosta To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.7 X-Spam_score_int: 7 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: On 19 Jan 2015 23:59, "guskant" wrote: > > 2015-01-20 2:08 GMT+09:00 And Rosta : > > > > On 19 Jan 2015 16:52, "guskant" wrote: > >> A language consists of only sequences of symbols regulated by a > >> grammar, > > > > I think this is untrue. It's unclear what symbols are or whether grammar > > contains them, but grammar doesn't primarily regulate symbols; nor is there > > any x such that a language consists of only sequences of x. (I'm open to > > bring persuaded otherwise, mind.) > > > > This is all of no relevance to the present discussion, but in the larger > > picture of loglanging the question of what a language is (and how known > > languages work) is very important. > > > > --And. > > > > My usage of the term "language" conforms to the definition of the term > in model theory: > http://mathworld.wolfram.com/FormalLanguage.html [...] Content analysis details: (0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.7 DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL RBL: Envelope sender listed in dnsbl.ahbl.org [listed in gmail.com.rhsbl.ahbl.org. IN] [A] 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: wolfram.com] -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [209.85.215.47 listed in wl.mailspike.net] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (and.rosta[at]gmail.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders Subject: Re: [Llg-members] nu ningau so'u se jbovlaste / updating a few jbovlaste entries X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6050759557882078040==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============6050759557882078040== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3561eeac711050d0b22e9 --001a11c3561eeac711050d0b22e9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 19 Jan 2015 23:59, "guskant" wrote: > > 2015-01-20 2:08 GMT+09:00 And Rosta : > > > > On 19 Jan 2015 16:52, "guskant" wrote: > >> A language consists of only sequences of symbols regulated by a > >> grammar, > > > > I think this is untrue. It's unclear what symbols are or whether grammar > > contains them, but grammar doesn't primarily regulate symbols; nor is there > > any x such that a language consists of only sequences of x. (I'm open to > > bring persuaded otherwise, mind.) > > > > This is all of no relevance to the present discussion, but in the larger > > picture of loglanging the question of what a language is (and how known > > languages work) is very important. > > > > --And. > > > > My usage of the term "language" conforms to the definition of the term > in model theory: > http://mathworld.wolfram.com/FormalLanguage.html Yes, I know, but that's the very notion of "language" that infects 'loglinguistics' and has done no end of damage to Lojban. Lojban was created by people who knew about formal languages, but knew nothing about human languages, and failed to realize that they have nothing in common apart from being polysemes of the same English word. This is irrelevant to discussion of the language of lojbo dictionary definitions, but this formal language stuff has been so damaging to Lojban that I feel I ought to make some effort to stamp out any recrudescence of it. --And. --001a11c3561eeac711050d0b22e9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On 19 Jan 2015 23:59, "guskant" <gusni.kantu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2015-01-20 2:08 GMT+09:00 And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>:
> >
> > On 19 Jan 2015 16:52, "guskant" <gusni.kantu@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> A language consists of only sequences of symbols regulated by= a
> >> grammar,
> >
> > I think this is untrue. It's unclear what symbols are or whet= her grammar
> > contains them, but grammar doesn't primarily regulate symbols= ; nor is there
> > any x such that a language consists of only sequences of x. (I= 9;m open to
> > bring persuaded otherwise, mind.)
> >
> > This is all of no relevance to the present discussion, but in the= larger
> > picture of loglanging the question of what a language is (and how= known
> > languages work) is very important.
> >
> > --And.
> >
>
> My usage of the term "language" conforms to the definition o= f the term
> in model theory:
> http://ma= thworld.wolfram.com/FormalLanguage.html

Yes, I know, but that's the very notion of "languag= e" that infects 'loglinguistics' and has done no end of damage= to Lojban. Lojban was created by people who knew about formal languages, b= ut knew nothing about human languages, and failed to realize that they have= nothing in common apart from being polysemes of the same English word.

This is irrelevant to discussion of the language of lojbo di= ctionary definitions, but this formal language stuff has been so damaging t= o Lojban that I feel I ought to make some effort to stamp out any recrudesc= ence of it.

--And.

--001a11c3561eeac711050d0b22e9-- --===============6050759557882078040== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --===============6050759557882078040==--