Received: from localhost ([::1]:54816 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YDaqw-0004UW-SM; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 07:36:26 -0800 Received: from mail-la0-f49.google.com ([209.85.215.49]:43010) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YDaqu-0004UP-Rk for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 07:36:25 -0800 Received: by mail-la0-f49.google.com with SMTP id hs14so35050198lab.8 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 07:36:17 -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=xFxugeuLTzrlhQLy1KsaNaECmmVvliTN91EdEk3MBVo=; b=UQU7KTkoyQd4dPz2RFZHKQlttEBQ/BYgKJ8HdsDV75J00VplOTxvvAxSygj0tLtN42 WvdPPDh35cLAl1L+CTGzIMK8JJD058/oEObG5HwON5fDpba4CTsKOBKu+tCtKKOGF1O9 93WQGZBQ953t/guomhSACAg/IMg7X42tmiZE/cjIU3fS7ZTH9cXifpY/v1v9lsBli5xo PMEi9vuHqM6GPZMKZ/WMHX70sQB/Qjnu0TPnsFupvYllUjDUK0fG7N6c8nLvL/4jgoYf ZDV2NB/gam4Ri5VabIZSI3UYZbeMeaw+2aD6bfkZXgGQkY1b2xpMVUohngurX9pfxUY5 znbA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.5.226 with SMTP id v2mr39149868lav.34.1421768177385; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 07:36:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.70.212 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 07:36:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.70.212 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 07:36:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <54BE62C4.3070807@lojban.org> References: <0CD5A578A47549238B8B046A01B8846C@gmail.com> <54BCF147.1080803@lojban.org> <54BCFC70.2010805@selpahi.de> <54BE62C4.3070807@lojban.org> Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 15:36:17 +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 20 Jan 2015 14:14, "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" < wrote: > > On 1/19/2015 8:12 PM, And Rosta wrote: >> >> > 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. > > > Since I know nothing much about formal languages, and know something (not much) about human languages, and I am one of the creators of Lojban, your claim is false. (The above-cited definition of "formal language has never entered into my considerations regarding Lojban, even if others are making use of it). > > JCB almost certainly knew even less about formal languages than I do. [...] 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: lojban.org] -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [209.85.215.49 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="===============5198965868897343575==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============5198965868897343575== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d1e522a8696050d173351 --089e013d1e522a8696050d173351 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 20 Jan 2015 14:14, "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" < lojbab@lojban.org> wrote: > > On 1/19/2015 8:12 PM, And Rosta wrote: >> >> > 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. > > > Since I know nothing much about formal languages, and know something (not much) about human languages, and I am one of the creators of Lojban, your claim is false. (The above-cited definition of "formal language has never entered into my considerations regarding Lojban, even if others are making use of it). > > JCB almost certainly knew even less about formal languages than I do. My claim is true. I make only the obvious and essentially incontrovertible claim that the authors of the formal grammars knew something about formal grammars; I don't claim that everyone with a hand in creating Lojban had a hand in creating the formal grammars. --And. --089e013d1e522a8696050d173351 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On 20 Jan 2015 14:14, "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG&qu= ot; <lojbab@lojban.org> wrot= e:
>
> On 1/19/2015 8:12 PM, And Rosta wrote:
>>
>> =C2=A0> My usage of the term "language" conforms to t= he definition of the term
>> =C2=A0> in model theory:
>> =C2=A0> 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 nothin= g
>> about human languages, and failed to realize that they have nothin= g in
>> common apart from being polysemes of the same English word.
>
>
> Since I know nothing much about formal languages, and know something (= not much) about human languages, and I am one of the creators of Lojban, yo= ur claim is false.=C2=A0 (The above-cited definition of "formal langua= ge has never entered into my considerations regarding Lojban, even if other= s are making use of it).
>
> JCB almost certainly knew even less about formal languages than I do.<= /p>

My claim is true.
I make only the obvious and essentially incontrovertible claim that the aut= hors of the formal grammars knew something about formal grammars; I don'= ;t claim that everyone with a hand in creating Lojban had a hand in creatin= g the formal grammars.

--And.

--089e013d1e522a8696050d173351-- --===============5198965868897343575== 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 --===============5198965868897343575==--