MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <dbf42712-41f4-f461-36ae-360ceb1d2e94@gmail.com>
References: <dbf42712-41f4-f461-36ae-360ceb1d2e94@gmail.com>
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 23:28:17 +0000
Message-ID: <CACf3dPnWFyB5BKoqkFXbsWP3Pes4kE6UKVdPwC+d9sSv6xG_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
To: llg-members@lojban.org
X-Spam_score: -2.0
X-Spam_score_int: -19
X-Spam_bar: --
Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Unfinished Business: BPFK
X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21
Precedence: list
List-Id: <llg-members.lojban.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/options/llg-members>,
 <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/private/llg-members/>
List-Post: <mailto:llg-members@lojban.org>
List-Help: <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members>,
 <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3748212542851377014=="
Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org

--===============3748212542851377014==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045fa526f5bc200562ed15f0"

--f403045fa526f5bc200562ed15f0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 5 Jan 2018 15:31, "Ilmen" <ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com> wrote:

=E2=94=8C=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=
=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=
=80=E2=94=90
=E2=94=82 =E2=94=98

I'm not certain that everything in a loglang must have a representation in
the logical form, specifically things like information structure markers
(e.g. {ba'e}, {kau}) and possibly some attitudinals or discursives.

Maybe we should allow some extralogical information to be lost in a
conversion from the phonological from to PAS and then back to the
phonological form.

But maybe even information structure markers could be expressed in the PAS,
in the form of a separate proposition like "I emphasize the word X in my
previous utterance".


Everything illocutionary and information-structural can be expressed in
PAS, I would argue. Indeed I would argue that everything that can be
expressed in natural language can be couched in PAS.

However, just because that's what I'd argue doesn't mean we have to
presuppose it to be true. But it seems to me that that if there did turn
out to be stuff that a natlang can express but a loglang can't, that's
something the loglang group (Motion 2, I think) should deliberate then, if
that hypothetical situation comes to pass, rather than something that must
be deliberated now.

--And.

--f403045fa526f5bc200562ed15f0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto"><div><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gma=
il_quote">On 5 Jan 2018 15:31, &quot;Ilmen&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ilme=
n.pokebip@gmail.com">ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attr=
ibution"><blockquote class=3D"quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left=
:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
 =20

   =20
 =20
  <div bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D"#000000">
    <pre>=E2=94=8C=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=
=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=
=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=90
=E2=94=82 =E2=94=98

I&#39;m not certain that everything in a loglang must have a representation=
 in
the logical form, specifically things like information structure markers
(e.g. {ba&#39;e}, {kau}) and possibly some attitudinals or discursives.

Maybe we should allow some extralogical information to be lost in a
conversion from the phonological from to PAS and then back to the
phonological form.

But maybe even information structure markers could be expressed in the PAS,
in the form of a separate proposition like &quot;I emphasize the word X in =
my
previous utterance&quot;. </pre></div></blockquote></div></div></div><div d=
ir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Everything illocutionary and inform=
ation-structural can be expressed in PAS, I would argue. Indeed I would arg=
ue that everything that can be expressed in natural language can be couched=
 in PAS.=C2=A0=C2=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">How=
ever, just because that&#39;s what I&#39;d argue doesn&#39;t mean we have t=
o presuppose it to be true. But it seems to me that that if there did turn =
out to be stuff that a natlang can express but a loglang can&#39;t, that=
9;s something the loglang group (Motion 2, I think) should deliberate then,=
 if that hypothetical situation comes to pass, rather than something that m=
ust be deliberated now.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">=
--And.</div></div>

--f403045fa526f5bc200562ed15f0--


--===============3748212542851377014==
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

--===============3748212542851377014==--