Received: from mail-bw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.214.61]:33257)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRC1ycT2BBoEcJD4uw@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RUMFa-0006l3-VE; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:41:26 -0800
Received: by bkat2 with SMTP id t2sf5705992bka.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:41:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender
         :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list
         :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        bh=RABiZlEmuoJnaSMRJFs0NUMlG+f87q+qYnr61wtByKA=;
        b=DVPUam/9JVBsALm/OL/gMIkh30EPhzMfzc+I/+xXhf+QgDQTzqwSeU+DR6vrkUZNyw
         FH5Mo40D3jfCryXLJuu/zy+i901gd1VL/76vY6bq6Hxz8UBLErRQz7VxCmJr6sN2AHjM
         cniGbF9OoI3inohT5cJFl/NN8Dt7QMYt2SygY=
Received: by 10.204.154.78 with SMTP id n14mr5487679bkw.31.1322329269865;
        Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:41:09 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.204.200.144 with SMTP id ew16ls4686882bkb.2.gmail; Sat, 26 Nov
 2011 09:41:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.205.127.148 with SMTP id ha20mr5816779bkc.6.1322329268531;
        Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:41:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.205.127.148 with SMTP id ha20mr5816777bkc.6.1322329268514;
        Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:41:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f49.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f49.google.com [209.85.215.49])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z7si1503559fam.1.2011.11.26.09.41.08
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:41:08 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.49 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.49;
Received: by mail-lpp01m010-f49.google.com with SMTP id u2so217305lag.36
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:41:08 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.152.112.10 with SMTP id im10mr23418188lab.2.1322328949829;
 Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:35:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.152.19.198 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:35:49 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20111126154114.GC27177@gonzales>
References: <20111124044118.GF6112@gonzales>
	<CAO7tK2cfhJtrvLX1S6Mga_CJU2nLyt96_4DR=ygJksH3ixaamg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111126112901.GA27177@gonzales>
	<CAO7tK2eVfy5iEv4Qy5HWhhVu+ATV3nzUJS=yqKR-tR3Tp6vG6Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111126154114.GC27177@gonzales>
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 14:35:49 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2d9HQKweQJ_RE67GS-+hr=tEL_bzsZgEUfdCavxyOpLXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] semantic parser - tersmu-0.1rc1
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.49 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
>
> Hmm. I wonder if I now finally understand part of xorlo: would you say
> that {lo broda} is equivalent, under this side-clause interpretation of
> {noi} you've just set out, to {le broda noi broda}?

I can't think of any reason why not, but then I'm not completely
satisfied that I understand "le".

> I don't know about {lo}, but presumably {le broda ku voi brode} is
> equivalent to {le broda je brode}.

Let's see.

Assuming

(1) le broda = zo'e noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka broda

(2) ko'a voi broda = ko'a noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka broda

Then we have:

(3) le broda ku voi brode = zo'e noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka broda zi'e
noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka brode

 which I'm happy to reduce to:

(4) le broda ku voi brode = zo'e noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka broda .e lo ka brode

I'm not so sure about the move to:

(5) le broda ku voi brode = zo'e noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka broda gi'e brode

and then to:

(6) le broda ku voi brode = zo'e noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka broda je brode

which would give us:

(7) le broda ku voi brode = le broda je brode

The move from (4) to (5) is the one I find most suspect. It has to do
with the semantics of "skicu", and of course also definitions (1) and
(2) in terms of "skicu" may or may not be right.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.